Range Ruminations: Is “Take Half, Leave Half” a Good Way to Calculate Stocking Rate?

Jeff Mosley MSU ExtensionBy Dr. Jeff Mosley, MSU Extension Range Management Specialist

Former eastern Montana rancher and Past President of the Society for Range Management Dan Fulton once wrote, “Range, and particularly Great Plains range, cannot be rationally managed on the basis of range carrying capacity surveys. The only way to know for sure how many cows can run on it is by grazing cows on it.” Fulton’s statement reminds us that grazing management is a circle. We begin by observing the land and animals, and then make a plan based on what we have observed. Next we implement the plan and observe how well the plan is working. Based on what we observe, we make adjustments, observe again, make more adjustments, and so on. Grazing capacity surveys and stocking rate calculations can provide helpful estimates of an area’s sustainable stocking rate, and these ballpark estimates can be used to develop a plan, but they are not the final answer.

Stocking rate calculations include an estimate of proper utilization, and historically in Montana, the concept of “take half, leave half” (i.e., 50% utilization) has often been used. This approach recognizes that to remain healthy, grass plants must replace about 1/3 of their roots each year, and grass plants stop growing roots when more than 50% of their current year’s foliage is removed during the growing season. I believe 50% utilization is an appropriate threshold for growing-season grazing wherever most forage plants have similar palatability that results in relatively homogeneous levels of grazing among plants. However, I believe stocking rate calculations using 50% utilization provide stocking rates that are unnecessarily conservative in some situations and stocking rates that are unsustainable in other circumstances.

Situation #1. Grass plant response to grazing definitely depends on how much foliage is removed during the growing season, but plant response also depends on when the grazing occurs. Plants grazed later in the growing season can sustain 60-70% utilization if they have already had sufficient time earlier in the growing season to grow foliage, grow roots, and replenish energy reserves. Plants can sustain 80% utilization if grazing occurs when foliage and roots are not growing during winter plant dormancy.

Situation #2. Late spring/early summer is generally the time when grasses are most vulnerable to defoliation, but plant response to grazing also depends on how often grazing occurs. Grass plant health declines when 50% defoliation during late spring/early summer occurs for more than two successive years. Two years in a row is okay, but more than two consecutive years of moderate grazing during late spring/early summer is not sustainable. Some form of rotational grazing is necessary when moderate use occurs during late spring/early summer. A moderately stocked rotational grazing system that provides rest during late spring/early summer once every three years averages 33% utilization across the three years (50% use in Year 1 + 50% in Year 2 + 0% in Year 3 / 3 years = 33%). In this situation, stocking rate calculations should be based on 33% rather than 50% utilization.

Situation #3. Typically when utilization averages 50% on bunchgrass rangeland, many or most bunchgrasses have received heavy use (e.g., 70% utilization), a few bunchgrasses have received light use (e.g., 30% utilization), and a few bunchgrasses have remained ungrazed. Preferred bunchgrasses grazed during the growing season at 70% utilization are unable to grow roots and replenish energy reserves. Thus, some form of rotational grazing is necessary on bunchgrass rangeland grazed moderately during the growing season.

A 2-pasture rotational grazing system that provides growing season rest every other year averages 35% utilization for the preferred bunchgrasses over the 2-year period (70% use in Year 1 + 0% use in Year 2 = 35% utilization), which is safely below the 50% threshold. In this 2-pasture system, stocking rate calculations should be based on 25% utilization rather than 50% utilization (i.e., 50% in Year 1 + 0% in Year 2 / 2 years = 25% utilization).

Similarly, a 3-pasture rotational grazing system that provides growing season rest one year out of every three averages 47% utilization during the growing season for the preferred bunchgrasses over the 3-year period (70% use in Year 1 + 70% use in Year 2 + 0% utilization in Year 3 / 3 years = 47% utilization), again safely below the 50% utilization threshold. In this 3-pasture system, stocking rate calculations should be based on 33% rather than 50% utilization (i.e., 50% in Years 1 and 2 and 0% in Year 3, averaging 33% across the three years). This example also illustrates the incentive for 3-pasture versus 2-pasture rotational grazing systems. The 3-pasture system can be sustainably stocked 32% heavier than the 2-pasture system (i.e., 33% utilization – 25% utilization / 25% utilization = 32% increase).

In summary, stocking rate calculations can help inform grazing management planning and decision-making, but an area’s sustainable stocking rate can only be determined by making your best guess, implementing your plan, and then making adjustments as needed based on how the land and animals respond. Going forward, I suggest that initial stocking rate estimates will be more accurate and helpful when stocking rate calculations adjust the take half, leave half approach (i.e., 50% utilization) when needed, accounting for the time of year that grazing occurs, how often grazing occurs among years, and how much utilization levels vary among individual forage plants. Happy ruminating.

Consumers Demand Beef in the Meat Case | Checkoff Chat

Beef in the Meat Case Consumer Demand

Beef retains a 49% share of retail dollar sales in grocery meat cases.

Q: Do consumers still want beef?

A: Yes they do. Consumer demand for beef is strong. In fact, even with higher beef prices, demand for beef increased nearly 7 percent in 2014, and beef brought more sales for foodservice and retail operators than any other protein.

When it comes to price, consumer say beef is worth it. According the Beef Checkoff’s Consumer Beef Index, 70 percent say steaks are worth the price, and 83 percent feel this way regarding ground beef.

The signal is clear: Consumers want beef. Nothing delivers a satisfying meal quite like beef, and consumers remain willing to spend more for the beef they want, even more so than for other proteins. Read more from Beef Issues Quarterly.

Checkoff Chat Montana Beef CouncilRead more about the Beef Checkoff Programs in our Checkoff Chat Series with the Montana Beef Council. Click here to submit your own questions to be answered in future posts.

About the Beef Checkoff
The Beef Checkoff Program (MyBeefCheckoff.com) was established as part of the 1985 Farm Bill. It assesses $1 per head on the sale of live domestic and imported cattle, in addition to a comparable assessment on imported beef and beef products. States retain up to 50 cents on the $1 and forward the other 50 cents to the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, which administers the national checkoff program, subject to USDA approval. The Montana Beef Council was created in 1954 by cattlemen as a marketing organization for the Montana beef industry and is organized to protect and increase demand for beef and beef products through state, national and international beef promotion, research and education, thereby enhancing profit opportunities for Montana beef producers.

Running Ranchers Bring Beef and Fitness to Television

Motnana Running Ranchers Ragnar 2015 VanIt’s been a busy week getting the word out about our Montana Running Ranchers relay team and the Team Beef program. This has included sharing the word in a few different television programs across the state.

On Tuesday, our friends at the Northern Ag Networkwere kind enough to include us in a segment on the Noon News which airs on CBS stations across the state. Lane Nordlund is a great person to work with and has been a great addition to the NAN team during the past year. Read our story on the Northern Ag Network site.

We then had a great opportunity to be featured on the statewide Wake Up Montana morning news, which is broadcast on ABC Fox Montana and KULR (Billings). Stephanie Ponte is a great reporter new to the area, and new to the topics of beef and ranching. There are morning people, then there are folks who are filled with tons of energy and enthusiasm before 6 a.m. It was great to meet Stephanie and we look forward to introducing her to even more Montana ranchers. Thanks for helping us share our story of beef and fitness in the ranching community and how everyone can include beef as part of a healthy diet and lifestyle! Read our story on KULR8.

Next up for many of the relay team members are the Bozeman Marathon and Half Marathon, September 13. Later that week, they’ll also be taking part in the inaugural Montana CattleWomen Ranch Run, a 25 mile relay on ranches in Lennep. We hope you’ll consider showing up, cheering everyone on and possibly even joining the races.

To learn more about the Team Beef Montana program, visit the Montana Beef Council’s website. Go ahead and fill out your application to join the program!

Be sure to follow the Montana Running Ranchers through Facebook! Running these 200-mile relays is so much more than showing up for 27 hours of fun. There are plenty of training runs, ranching adventures and races across Montana that team members participate in. Join the Facebook group, encourage team members and learn more about how beef is part of their training and competition.

Monitor Bulls for Activity and Injuries During Breeding Season

cobb charolais bullThe majority of beef herds in this region are in the heart of their breeding seasons, and many of those that aren’t will start their breeding seasons soon.

“From a management standpoint, the work isn’t over once breeding soundness exams are conducted and potentially fertile bulls are turned out to breeding pastures,” says Carl Dahlen, North Dakota State University Extension Service beef cattle specialist.

To ensure a successful breeding season, bulls should be monitored carefully for breeding activity, injuries and overall condition throughout their time in breeding pastures, he advises. The desire of a bull to breed, or libido, is not something that can be determined during a breeding soundness exam. In addition, breeding is a learned behavior, so producers should pay particular attention to monitoring yearling bulls.

“To monitor breeding activity, simply take the time to watch pastures and make sure bulls are actively seeking and breeding females,” Dahlen says. “While watching bulls, physical deformities (deviated penis, inability to extend penis, etc.) and other issues that can prevent successful intromission and ejaculation from occurring also can be identified. In these instances, a bull may be mounting cows in heat but not completing a successful breeding. Pay attention to the entire mating process to make sure erection, intromission and ejaculation all are occurring.”

Injuries are another major issue that can be identified while monitoring bulls. Some injuries can severely limit or eliminate a bull’s ability or desire to breed females successfully. A summary of breeding soundness exam results from North Dakota veterinarians revealed that injuries to reproductive organs were a major reason for mature bulls failing tests.

“As these injuries were identified during a breeding soundness exam and not during the breeding season, close observation is required,” Dahlen says.

Major injuries that would make bulls physically unable to perform, such as broken or sprained legs, likely would be easy to spot. Lacerations that result in a penis not being able to retract are easy to see as well. Other cases are not as easy to identify. For example, swelling just ahead of the scrotum may indicate a “broken penis” or a hematoma, and swollen or misshapen testicles may indicate testicular injuries.

Injuries may cause physical pain and a low libido, or a bull may be willing to breed but is no longer capable. In any case, part of the healing process can create scar tissue, and this scar tissue may interfere with future reproduction.

Dahlen recommends observing bulls interacting with females and females interacting with each other early in the breeding season because those interactions can give a good indication of the relative proportion of females that are cyclic.

If all cows are cyclic, producers should expect to see almost 5 percent in estrus on a daily basis. Fewer and fewer females will be in estrus on a daily basis from the middle to the end of the breeding season.

So if 65 percent of the cows became pregnant in the first 21 days, then only 35 percent of the herd remains to be bred. This means less than 2 percent of cows would be in estrus per day from day 22 to 42 of the breeding season. After day 42 of the breeding season, less than 1 percent of females should be in estrus every other day for the remainder of the breeding season.

Ideally, cows should be on an increasing plane of nutrition with sufficient supplies of mineral and high-quality pastures or feeds during the breeding season. If close observation of pastures reveals that a relatively similar proportion of cows are in estrus in the middle of the breeding season, compared with early in the breeding season, then some type of intervention is critical.

Once bulls have been evaluated for injuries, body condition and libido, and single-sire pasture bulls have been evaluated for the ability to mate successfully, producers should take active steps to rotate or replace bulls that are injured, have low libido or are in pastures with a high proportion of estrus cows late in the breeding season.

“Identifying potential issues before the end of the breeding season can allow a producer to take active steps to salvage the remainder of the breeding season and ensure a greater proportion of the herd becomes pregnant,” Dahlen says.

For more information, contact Dahlen at (701) 231-5588 or [email protected], or NDSU Extension veterinarian and livestock stewardship specialist Gerald Stokka at (701) 231-5082 or [email protected].

Montana Running Ranchers Take Beef Message on 200-Mile Relay

Montana Running Ranchers logoIn the world of running and fitness, challenges are king as obstacle courses and overnight-relay races have gained popularity in recent years by fitness enthusiasts and health-conscious consumers. Montana ranchers are taking part in the fun and using this scene as an opportunity to advocate for beef as part of a healthy diet and lifestyle.

On July 17 and 18, twelve members of the Montana Running Ranchers relay team took part in the Ragnar Relay Series Northwest Passage race. This event began in Blaine, Washington and covered 200(ish) miles, wrapping up in Langley. The team finished the race in just under 27 hours, placing 26th in the division, out of 354 teams.

This year’s course took the team along iconic sights of the northwest Washington coast. Right from the start near the Canadian border, team members ran in view of the Cascade and Olympic Mountain ranges, Deception Pass and the Puget Sound. The team ran through the night and completed the race on Whidbey Island northwest of Seattle.

The Montana Running Ranchers Relay team consists of members from the state’s ranching community, participating in large relay events outside the state and connecting with beef consumers from across the country. During previous years, the team has traveled to events in Colorado, Napa Valley and the Hood to Coast event in Oregon.

Motnana Running Ranchers Ragnar 2015 VanThe race events provide an opportunity for Montana Running Ranchers to connect with others who have similar interests in health and fitness. The teams vans were decorated in Team Beef logos and brands from area ranches who sponsored the trip. These brands (and steaks) do not go unnoticed by event participants, which often leads to opportunities to answer several questions about beef as part of a healthy diet, Montana’s ranchers and the cattle industry.

This year’s team members include team captain, Aeric Reilly of Great Falls, Ryan Goodman of Helena, Casey Coulter of Brusett, Sarah Nash of Harlowton, Billie Jo Holzer of Moccasin, Christy Gerdes of Huntley, Evelyn Halverson of Big Timber, Rachel Keaster of Belt, Christy Pletan of Harlowton, Rex Reilly of Stanford, and Ronnie Halverson of Big Timber. This year’s team also included an out of state recruit and Montana State alumnus from Ione, Oregon, Ed Rollins.

The team certainly appreciates support of local businesses and Montana ranchers who contribute to the opportunity for this advocacy effort. High Country Snack Foods supplied beef jerky and pemmican for the team to share with runners along the course. A special thank you to Western Ag Reporter for helping promote the team throughout the year.

Montana Running Ranchers Ragnar 2015 Blaine WashingtonBe sure to follow Montana Running Ranchers team members throughout the year as they compete in running events across the state and continue sharing their experiences with runners from outside the agriculture community. Follow the team throughout the year by joining the “Montana Running Ranchers/ Team Beef Montana” group on Facebook.

To learn more about joining Team Beef Montana, a consumer outreach program of the Montana Beef Council, visit montanabeefcouncil.org.

2015 team sponsors included the following Montana ranches and businesses:

  • Montana Beef Council
  • Montana Farmers Union
  • Montana Land Reliance
  • Western Ag Reporter
  • Silveus Insurance Group
  • Stockgrowers
  • U.S. Cattlemens
  • Dick and Cathy Holzer
  • Rance Gerdes
  • Indian Creek Ranch
  • Mick & Earline Gaettle
  • Jerry Jones
  • Earl & Glenda Stucky
  • Deegan Ranch
  • Walborn Cattle Co.
  • Neal & Janice Woldstad
  • John & Jeanne Mohr
  • Redland Red Angus
  • Sharon Livingston
  • Linda Grosskropf
  • Ehlke Herefords
  • Ginger Silvers
  • Mike & Debbie Hammond
  • 3C Cattle Company – Chad and Lacey Sutherlin

MSU Students Place Second in Regional Animal Science Competition

Rachel Endecott, Montana State University Extension Beef Cattle SpecialistBy Dr. Rachel Endecott, MSU Extension Beef Cattle Specialist

Happy summer! This month, I’m proud to feature this press release from MSU News Service about the MSU Academic Quadrathlon Team.

BOZEMAN – Four students from Montana State University’s Department of Animal and Range Sciences in the College of Agriculture placed second in the Western Region Academic Quadrathlon, held June 22-23 in Ruidoso, N.M.

The regional contest was held in conjunction with the 2015 Western Section American Society of Animal Science meetings, hosted by New Mexico State University. The MSU team competed with four other universities in the western region, including California State University-Chico, New Mexico State University, Oregon State University and Utah State University.

L to R, Elena Combs, Alyson Hicks-Lynch, Bailey Engle, Emily Griswold

L to R, Elena Combs, Alyson Hicks-Lynch, Bailey Engle, Emily Griswold

Elena Combs of Missoula, Bailey Engle of Big Timber, Emily Griswold of Millerstown, Pa., and Alyson Hicks-Lynch of Hood River, Ore. competed in a four-part contest that consisted of a comprehensive written exam, impromptu oral presentation, hands-on lab practicum and a double-elimination quiz bowl tournament.

“Elena, Bailey, Emily and Alyson did a spectacular job representing MSU at the contest,” said Rachel Endecott, team adviser and MSU beef cattle extension specialist. “I’m extremely proud of them and their hard work.”

All four students graduated in May from the department. Endecott said Combs has been accepted into the Washington, Idaho, Montana and Utah (WIMU) Regional Program in Veterinary Medicine and will complete her first year of veterinary school in Bozeman this fall. Engle will begin a five-year Ph.D. program in breeding and genetics at Texas A&M University. Griswold works as a veterinary technician at Sorenson Veterinary Clinic and is applying for vet school this year. Hicks-Lynch will begin a master’s degree program at Oregon State University in range management and ruminant nutrition this fall.

How Much Seed Should I Plant?

Emily Glunk Montana State Forage ExtensionDr. Emily Glunk, Extension Forage Specialist and Dr. Jessica Torrion, Crop Physiologist

Depending on who you ask, you may get a wide range in how much seed you should be planting per acre. There are a lot of factors to consider, but in my experience, there are many producers throughout the nation that are spending more money, and putting more seed in the ground, than is necessary. There are some situations where it may be desirable to increase your seeding rate, say in an irrigated field versus a dryland field, if the seedbed is less than optimal, or where the seeding depth is hard to get completely accurate due to rough terrain.

It is important to remember that not every seed that is dropped will result in a plant. This is where your seed tag can be helpful. On the seed tag, it should list a germination percentage. This is an estimate of how many of the seeds in that bag are actually viable and able to germinate. Also important on the tag is the list of other potential “contaminants”, such as weed seeds (which will be listed as a percentage), other seed, and inert matter. The percentage of each of these should be minimal.

Another factor that can decrease germination rates is the seeding rate itself. Research from other states has found an estimated 45% mortality rate in the first year for alfalfa planted at 10 pounds per acre, and a 60-70% mortality rate for seeding rates over 20 pounds/ acre. So having a high seeding rate can actually be detrimental to your seed!

The important thing to start with is how many plants do you need per square foot? This will then help you to calculate how many pounds of seed you will need per acre. There are many tables available which provide estimates of desired number of plants per square foot. Alfalfa, for example, 30 plants per square foot is an optimal target plant population. Now, that does not mean that every year thereafter we are expecting to have 30 plants per square foot. Competition amongst plants for nutrients, canopy space, and water will decrease that number to less than 20 plants per square foot just after the stand’s first winter.

There are approximately 199,000 alfalfa seeds in one pound of seed, which equates to about 5 seeds per square foot if that pound were spread evenly over an entire acre. So, to figure out how many seeds you are planting an acre for alfalfa, take your seeding rate (in pounds per acre), and multiply by 5. If you were planting at 8 pounds of Pure Live Seed (PLS, we’ll cover that later), that means that you are putting approximately 40 seeds per square foot. Will you see 40 plants per square foot? Likely not. Seeds will also compete with one another, just like germinated plants, for light, moisture, and nutrients, and the most competitive plants will survive.

How can we figure out then how many pounds of seed we need to put in the ground? Let’s first get back to that thing I mentioned before, pure live seed or PLS. This is the amount of seed that has the ability to germinate, and is what we should be using when we are considering how much to plant. To figure this out, we simply use the information provided on the seed tag.

seed tag how much to plant

Step 1. We first want to figure out the purity of the seed in the bag. To determine this, we simply subtract the percent other crop, percent innert matter, and percent weed seed from 100.

For this tag, it would look like:

100-.11-.69-.18= 99.02% purity.

As you will notice, this number is already on the seed tag, however, not all seed tags will list this.

Step 2. Next, we need to determine PLS by multiplying that percent purity by the percent germination, and then by 100 as a conversion factor. Also remember to convert your percent’s to decimals, so 99.02% would be .9902.

.9902 (% purity) * .93 (% germination) * 100= 92.08% PLS

You will notice the percent germination was not actually listed on the bag, but we were able to figure it out by dividing the PLS weight (2.79 pounds) by the bulk weight (3 pounds).

Step 3. To figure out how many pounds of PLS we would need to get our desired establishment rates with this bag, we would then divide the recommended seeding rate (usually listed on the tag, for this we’ll use 10 pounds).

10/ .9208 (PLS in decimal form)= 10.9 pounds required at seeding

For this particular bag, there was very high germination rates and low levels of foreign seed, so we didn’t have to increase our seeding rate that much to get the desired number of seeds in the ground. This may not always be the case, which is why knowing how to figure out your PLS rate is extremely important to attain adequate stand establishment.

One final note, just like any other crops, seed size can influence the number of seeds per pound. Bigger seeds means less seeds per pound, and smaller seeds mean more seeds per pound. This is something to be mindful of, and to ask of your seed dealer, when purchasing seed.

For a list of recommended seeding rates, contact myself, Dr. Jessica Torrion, or your local county extension agent. There are also numerous publications available with seeding rate recommendations, such as the “Dryland Pastures in Montana and Wyoming”.

If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Dr. Emily Glunk at 406-994-5688 or [email protected], or Dr. Jessica Torrion at [email protected]

Strategy for Managing Horn Flies

megan van emon msu extension beef specialistDr. Megan Van Emon, MSU Extension Beef Cattle Specialist

As I’m sure many of you have noticed, it’s shaping up to be another bad fly year.  Horn flies are common on beef cattle here in Montana.  Annual control costs and cattle production losses can exceed $780 million annually in the U.S.

Horn flies spend the majority of their time on animals and will move from the back to the sides of the belly during the heat of the day.  Female horn flies deposit their eggs in fresh manure and can deposit up to 500 eggs during her life.  Horn fly larvae hatch and develop in manure.  Several generations of flies occur during the summer, with adult horn fly populations typically peaking during late summer.  When temperatures decline in the fall, horn fly pupae hibernate in the soil.

Horn flies prefer larger animals (cows, steers, heifers, and bulls), and tend not to bother calves until late summer.  One horn fly can bite 20 to 30 times per day, which can result in thousands of bites per day in large populations.  Cattle that are infested with over 200 flies will begin to bunch together in an attempt to escape the flies.  Large populations of horn flies cause changes in grazing behavior and can reduce feed intake, which ultimately decreases production.  Production losses include reduced feed intake, reduced feed efficiency, decreased milk production, and decreased weight gain.

Multiple methods are available for controlling horn fly populations.  Insecticides are the primary method for horn fly control as other methods are ineffective.  Methods available for cattle on pasture include dust bags, ear tags, sprays, pour-ons, boluses, and feed additives.

Dust bags, back rubbers, and oilers are most effective when cattle must pass under them on their way to water, feed, or mineral.  Dust bags can also be placed in loafing areas where they can be used free-choice.  Ear tags contain insecticides that allow for small amounts to be released over time by traveling through the hair coat when the animal is moving or grooming.  When using animal sprays to control horn flies, complete coverage and penetration to the skin is essential.  Sprays are easily applied, but require multiple treatments throughout the summer because the control of horn flies only lasts 3 to 4 weeks.  Pour-ons are also easily used and provide effective treatment for several weeks when used properly.  However, pour-on control may vary with weather and other factors.  Feed additives and boluses may be incorporated in mineral blocks, loose mineral or tubs.  The insecticides included as a feed additive pass through to the manure and kills the fly larvae.  Feed additives are most effective when consumed in sufficient amounts all season long.

For additional information and horn fly control contact your local Extension office to request a copy of the MontGuide by Greg Johnson, MSU Veterinary Entomologist.  The article is entitled “Horn Flies on Cattle: Biology and Management” (MT200912AG) and contains additional information about horn fly biology and available insecticide products.

Learn about beef on mobile videos | Checkoff Chat

Check out the Beef. It's What's For Dinner YouTube page for educational videos about beef!

Check out the Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner YouTube page for educational videos about beef!

Q: Kids today are always watching stuff on their phones. Where is beef promotion in all this?

A: Throughout the year, consumers look to “Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner” videos for great beef meal ideas and recipe inspiration. In fact, beef checkoff-funded videos reached over 5 million consumers in 2014 alone. This worked to convey the message that lean beef is nutritious, delicious and easy to prepare for any occasion, any day of the week. The videos instructed consumers to create mouth-watering savory dishes for their family, like beef stir fry, lean beef hamburgers, steak salad and more.

Plus, with over 840,000 fans on the Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner. Facebook page as well as other social media properties, those kids are getting exposed to beef everywhere! Check out the videos for yourself on YouTube!

Checkoff Chat Montana Beef CouncilRead more about the Beef Checkoff Programs in our Checkoff Chat Series with the Montana Beef Council. Click here to submit your own questions to be answered in future posts.

About the Beef Checkoff
The Beef Checkoff Program (MyBeefCheckoff.com) was established as part of the 1985 Farm Bill. It assesses $1 per head on the sale of live domestic and imported cattle, in addition to a comparable assessment on imported beef and beef products. States retain up to 50 cents on the $1 and forward the other 50 cents to the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, which administers the national checkoff program, subject to USDA approval. The Montana Beef Council was created in 1954 by cattlemen as a marketing organization for the Montana beef industry and is organized to protect and increase demand for beef and beef products through state, national and international beef promotion, research and education, thereby enhancing profit opportunities for Montana beef producers.

Registered Dietitians Sharing Beef Online | Checkoff Chat

Q: Health always seems to have been a battle for beef. What is the checkoff doing with health professionals to fight back?

A: There are a number of health professionals engaged throughout the country. Right here in Montana, there is a Registered Dietitian on staff with the Montana Beef Council and she works to educate locally, while many other states also employ something similar. Nationally, there are many levels of health professional engagement through influencer immersion events, blogger outreach, conferences and more.

This engagement has led to many nutrition professionals sharing their love for beef. And with the strong nutrition content shared on their social platforms, the beef checkoff has been able to highlight many of these to help spread beef’s nutrition message to a broader audience through social channels, like @BeefRD on Twitter. Check out the dedicated beef nutrition website: BeefNutrition.org.

Checkoff Chat Montana Beef CouncilRead more about the Beef Checkoff Programs in our Checkoff Chat Series with the Montana Beef Council. Click here to submit your own questions to be answered in future posts.

About the Beef Checkoff
The Beef Checkoff Program (MyBeefCheckoff.com) was established as part of the 1985 Farm Bill. It assesses $1 per head on the sale of live domestic and imported cattle, in addition to a comparable assessment on imported beef and beef products. States retain up to 50 cents on the $1 and forward the other 50 cents to the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, which administers the national checkoff program, subject to USDA approval. The Montana Beef Council was created in 1954 by cattlemen as a marketing organization for the Montana beef industry and is organized to protect and increase demand for beef and beef products through state, national and international beef promotion, research and education, thereby enhancing profit opportunities for Montana beef producers.