WEBVTT 00:00:11.720 --> 00:00:15.060 Breaking free from the chains of the past Where 00:00:15.060 --> 00:00:18.820 truth moves faster than a Holstein calf No law 00:00:18.820 --> 00:00:21.660 waiting on some printed page We're charting new 00:00:21.660 --> 00:00:25.300 ground in the digital age From genomic codes 00:00:25.300 --> 00:00:29.120 to robot facts We cut through the noise, no hold 00:00:29.280 --> 00:00:32.460 them back not your daddy's dairy news tonight 00:00:32.460 --> 00:01:03.020 we're sparking Welcome to the Bullvine Podcast, 00:01:03.579 --> 00:01:06.480 the show that turns fresh dairy data into practical 00:01:06.480 --> 00:01:10.400 barn floor wins. I'm your host, and in this episode, 00:01:10.519 --> 00:01:13.040 we're busting open the real cost of a sick calf 00:01:13.040 --> 00:01:16.260 and the 2025 nutrition moves that flip those 00:01:16.260 --> 00:01:20.000 losses into profit. From $3 ,000 replacement 00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:23.219 heifer shocks to the hidden ROI inside a $35 00:01:23.219 --> 00:01:25.739 supplement, we've got the numbers and the game 00:01:25.739 --> 00:01:29.200 plan. Grab a coffee, step into the parlor, and 00:01:29.200 --> 00:01:31.790 let's get profitable. Welcome back to The Bullvine, 00:01:31.989 --> 00:01:34.230 your trusted source for the deep dive that truly 00:01:34.230 --> 00:01:36.609 digs deep into the topics that matter to dairy 00:01:36.609 --> 00:01:39.030 producers. That's right. Today we're tackling 00:01:39.030 --> 00:01:41.290 a really interesting feature article from The 00:01:41.290 --> 00:01:43.989 Bullvine that's got everyone talking in the industry. 00:01:44.189 --> 00:01:47.900 It's a piece titled The $35 CAF question. What 00:01:47.900 --> 00:01:50.620 three years of digging actually shows? We're 00:01:50.620 --> 00:01:52.459 going to unpack this thoroughly and see what 00:01:52.459 --> 00:01:54.359 insights it offers. You know, for a while now, 00:01:54.500 --> 00:01:57.040 we've all been hearing this figure tossed around. 00:01:57.319 --> 00:02:00.120 You hear it at industry meetups, conferences. 00:02:00.680 --> 00:02:04.540 The idea that a strategic, maybe $35 investment 00:02:04.540 --> 00:02:08.120 per CAF can yield a significant return. We're 00:02:08.120 --> 00:02:10.500 talking about potentially preventing a sick CAF 00:02:10.500 --> 00:02:12.509 that could, you know. end up costing you over 00:02:12.509 --> 00:02:15.810 $1 ,000. Treatment, labor, lost productivity, 00:02:16.229 --> 00:02:19.210 it adds up. Yeah, it really does. It sounds almost 00:02:19.210 --> 00:02:21.069 too good to be true, doesn't it? Yeah. Our author 00:02:21.069 --> 00:02:22.810 for this piece, well, they're a self -proclaimed 00:02:22.810 --> 00:02:24.969 skeptical farmer and they felt exactly the same 00:02:24.969 --> 00:02:27.409 way. Understandably so. Yeah. Tired of the marketing 00:02:27.409 --> 00:02:30.250 hype, they decided to really dig into the numbers, 00:02:30.389 --> 00:02:33.400 look beyond the glossy brochures. Right. Get 00:02:33.400 --> 00:02:36.180 past the sales pitch. Exactly. And look into 00:02:36.180 --> 00:02:39.400 real farm data spanning three years. Absolutely. 00:02:39.659 --> 00:02:42.539 And what's truly crucial here, I think, is that 00:02:42.539 --> 00:02:44.960 this isn't just about finding some kind of magic 00:02:44.960 --> 00:02:46.860 bullet supplement. You know, throw money at it 00:02:46.860 --> 00:02:50.240 and poof, calf problem's gone. If only it were 00:02:50.240 --> 00:02:53.080 that simple. Right. It's about exploring a systematic 00:02:53.080 --> 00:02:57.419 approach. Calf health. Growth. The article delves 00:02:57.419 --> 00:03:00.479 into this with impressive rigor. So let's unpack 00:03:00.479 --> 00:03:04.340 this $35 CAF question and see what three years 00:03:04.340 --> 00:03:06.639 of dedicated digging actually reveals for your 00:03:06.639 --> 00:03:08.900 operation. Yeah, our mission today is to cut 00:03:08.900 --> 00:03:10.759 through the noise, give you clear, actionable 00:03:10.759 --> 00:03:13.500 insights straight from the data in this article. 00:03:13.680 --> 00:03:15.580 Okay, so let's set the stage. Let's dive into 00:03:15.580 --> 00:03:17.900 the current market realities that really frame 00:03:17.900 --> 00:03:20.599 this whole $35 question. Good place to start. 00:03:20.780 --> 00:03:22.840 The author immediately highlights something we 00:03:22.840 --> 00:03:25.800 all feel acutely in our wallets, replacement 00:03:25.800 --> 00:03:29.080 huffers. They are incredibly expensive right 00:03:29.080 --> 00:03:31.180 now. Oh boy, are they ever. It's a cost that 00:03:31.180 --> 00:03:34.080 can really weigh on a producer's mind. What are 00:03:34.080 --> 00:03:36.039 the latest numbers looking like? And how do they 00:03:36.039 --> 00:03:37.659 underscore the importance of this discussion? 00:03:38.080 --> 00:03:39.759 Well, one of the most striking things the article 00:03:39.759 --> 00:03:42.580 points out is just the sheer scale of that cost. 00:03:42.740 --> 00:03:45.840 Right. The USDA AMS National Weekly Replacement 00:03:45.840 --> 00:03:49.340 Dairy Cattle Report. This is from July 15th, 00:03:49.340 --> 00:03:53.460 2025. It put bread heifers at an eye -watering 00:03:53.460 --> 00:03:58.599 $3 ,010 per head. $3 ,000. Wow. And no, that's 00:03:58.599 --> 00:04:00.800 not a typo. When you really think about that 00:04:00.800 --> 00:04:03.340 number, it profoundly underscores the immense 00:04:03.340 --> 00:04:05.599 financial blow. I mean, losing a calf or having 00:04:05.599 --> 00:04:08.759 one fail to thrive. Yeah. it instantly makes 00:04:08.759 --> 00:04:12.060 any investment in preventative care look incredibly 00:04:12.060 --> 00:04:14.719 valuable. Because the alternative, having to 00:04:14.719 --> 00:04:16.980 buy a replacement. The article calls it financially 00:04:16.980 --> 00:04:19.319 crippling. Crippling. That's a strong word, but 00:04:19.319 --> 00:04:21.879 probably accurate for many. It completely reframes 00:04:21.879 --> 00:04:23.920 the whole discussion. Upfront investment becomes 00:04:23.920 --> 00:04:26.079 critical cost avoidance, not just another expense 00:04:26.079 --> 00:04:28.480 line. Right. Every calf isn't just an animal. 00:04:28.560 --> 00:04:32.509 It's a potential $3 ,000 asset. Exactly. Protecting 00:04:32.509 --> 00:04:34.769 that asset becomes paramount. And that perspective, 00:04:34.810 --> 00:04:37.029 it truly puts things into focus, especially when 00:04:37.029 --> 00:04:39.509 we compare it to current milk prices. The article 00:04:39.509 --> 00:04:41.670 mentions milk prices are hovering around, what, 00:04:41.790 --> 00:04:45.949 $18 .93 per hundredweight? That was August 2025, 00:04:46.449 --> 00:04:49.129 USDA NASS. Yeah, around there. While not terrible, 00:04:49.389 --> 00:04:52.389 the author very candidly states there's no fat 00:04:52.389 --> 00:04:55.689 in these margins anymore. That's putting it bluntly. 00:04:55.790 --> 00:04:58.069 For a producer on the ground, what does that... 00:04:58.269 --> 00:05:00.290 Blunt assessment really mean when you're trying 00:05:00.290 --> 00:05:03.449 to navigate these soaring costs and, you know, 00:05:03.449 --> 00:05:05.769 regulatory changes. It means exactly what it 00:05:05.769 --> 00:05:07.649 sounds like. Yeah. I mean, in the most direct 00:05:07.649 --> 00:05:09.829 sense possible. There's just no wiggle room. 00:05:09.870 --> 00:05:12.170 No cushion. Zero financial cushion for error 00:05:12.170 --> 00:05:15.170 or unexpected expenses. Think about it. A bread 00:05:15.170 --> 00:05:17.550 heifer costs over three grand. Your milk check 00:05:17.550 --> 00:05:21.319 is OK, but not huge profit margins. Right. Any 00:05:21.319 --> 00:05:24.920 inefficiency, any unforeseen cost, it just eats 00:05:24.920 --> 00:05:28.180 directly and deeply into your bottom line. It 00:05:28.180 --> 00:05:30.740 demands a hyper -focus on efficiency, cost control. 00:05:30.860 --> 00:05:33.180 Especially in calf rearing. Absolutely. That's 00:05:33.180 --> 00:05:35.459 where a small issue can just balloon into a massive 00:05:35.459 --> 00:05:38.899 profit eroding expense. This tight margin environment, 00:05:39.220 --> 00:05:41.500 it just intensifies the importance of prevention. 00:05:41.819 --> 00:05:44.240 Because reacting after the fact costs more. Almost 00:05:44.240 --> 00:05:47.759 invariably. Vet costs, meds, labor for treatments, 00:05:47.819 --> 00:05:50.279 and the long -term productivity hits we haven't 00:05:50.279 --> 00:05:53.439 even gotten to yet. It's about optimizing every 00:05:53.439 --> 00:05:56.220 single dollar spent. Make sure it delivers maximum 00:05:56.220 --> 00:05:58.360 return. But here's where it gets truly significant. 00:05:58.500 --> 00:06:01.420 And this is a critical industry -wide shift. 00:06:02.319 --> 00:06:05.000 It's fundamentally changed the game for everyone 00:06:05.000 --> 00:06:07.899 in dairy since June 2023. Yeah, this is huge. 00:06:08.120 --> 00:06:12.199 The FDA classified all medically important antimicrobials 00:06:12.199 --> 00:06:14.899 as prescription only. This isn't just a minor 00:06:14.899 --> 00:06:18.100 tweak, is it? It's a whole new ballgame. It really 00:06:18.100 --> 00:06:20.259 brings up a pivotal question. What does this 00:06:20.259 --> 00:06:22.319 mean for our traditional management strategies, 00:06:22.620 --> 00:06:25.899 especially calf health? Right. You're absolutely 00:06:25.899 --> 00:06:28.019 right. It's far from minor. It's a seismic shift. 00:06:28.079 --> 00:06:30.500 It demands a complete reevaluation of how we 00:06:30.500 --> 00:06:32.860 manage disease prevention and treatment. So no 00:06:32.860 --> 00:06:35.300 more just reaching for antibiotics easily. Exactly. 00:06:35.399 --> 00:06:38.120 The article perfectly puts it. The days of metaphylactic 00:06:38.120 --> 00:06:40.740 treatments as a management crutch, they're effectively 00:06:40.740 --> 00:06:43.680 over. And just to clarify, metaphylactic is treating 00:06:43.680 --> 00:06:45.759 the whole group before they show symptoms, right? 00:06:45.839 --> 00:06:48.879 Right. Based on risk. Correct. Treating a group 00:06:48.879 --> 00:06:51.149 preemptively. Because you anticipate exposure 00:06:51.149 --> 00:06:55.350 or stress. That easy, broad brush, reactive approach. 00:06:56.370 --> 00:06:58.470 Where we can maybe just treat problems away. 00:06:59.129 --> 00:07:02.550 It's gone. This regulatory change inherently 00:07:02.550 --> 00:07:06.089 forces a much more proactive, strategic approach 00:07:06.089 --> 00:07:08.490 to calf health. No more reactive. You have to 00:07:08.490 --> 00:07:10.750 prevent it. Every producer must now prioritize 00:07:10.750 --> 00:07:13.529 prevention, robust health protocols, optimizing 00:07:13.529 --> 00:07:16.930 immunity. That old safety net of readily available 00:07:16.930 --> 00:07:19.810 antimicrobials. It's been significantly tightened. 00:07:19.970 --> 00:07:22.709 Which pushes us towards these preventative strategies. 00:07:23.089 --> 00:07:25.389 It makes an upfront investment like this potential 00:07:25.389 --> 00:07:29.170 $35 program. Not just a good idea, but increasingly... 00:07:29.399 --> 00:07:31.920 well, a necessity for maintaining calf health 00:07:31.920 --> 00:07:34.199 and crucially profitability in this new landscape. 00:07:34.360 --> 00:07:36.220 It's about building resilience from the inside 00:07:36.220 --> 00:07:38.240 out. That's a great way to put it. So connecting 00:07:38.240 --> 00:07:40.279 this to the big picture, this new regulatory 00:07:40.279 --> 00:07:43.120 environment, it drastically changes the economics 00:07:43.120 --> 00:07:45.680 of sickness prevention. Totally. It positions 00:07:45.680 --> 00:07:48.040 those upfront investments in calf health in a 00:07:48.040 --> 00:07:49.800 completely different light. It's not just about 00:07:49.800 --> 00:07:52.639 potentially saving a bit of money anymore. No, 00:07:52.639 --> 00:07:55.399 it's about navigating a future where the old 00:07:55.399 --> 00:07:58.540 ways just aren't viable. Or economically prudent. 00:07:58.680 --> 00:08:01.199 It's about future -proofing your operation. Precisely. 00:08:01.279 --> 00:08:04.220 This regulatory shift elevates the discussion 00:08:04.220 --> 00:08:07.439 from, you know, an optional expense to an integral 00:08:07.439 --> 00:08:09.500 part of risk management. Because the penalty 00:08:09.500 --> 00:08:12.199 for getting it wrong is higher now. Exponentially 00:08:12.199 --> 00:08:15.100 higher. Without easy access to broad -spectrum 00:08:15.100 --> 00:08:18.639 antimicrobials, the cost of a sick calf, or worse, 00:08:18.819 --> 00:08:24.040 a herd outbreak, it skyrockets. Labor costs alone. 00:08:24.339 --> 00:08:27.100 Oh yeah. Daily treatments. potential chronic 00:08:27.100 --> 00:08:30.560 issues, the direct loss if an animal dies. Therefore, 00:08:30.720 --> 00:08:32.620 any investment that reduces disease incidence 00:08:32.620 --> 00:08:35.279 strengthens natural defenses. Like colostrum 00:08:35.279 --> 00:08:37.340 targeted nutrition. Exactly. It becomes a highly 00:08:37.340 --> 00:08:39.639 strategic move. Build resilience from the ground 00:08:39.639 --> 00:08:41.820 up rather than relying on treatments as your 00:08:41.820 --> 00:08:44.519 main defense after the fact. It forces a fundamental 00:08:44.519 --> 00:08:47.159 rethink of calf care. Proactive intervention 00:08:47.159 --> 00:08:49.940 is key. So with those market realities and regulatory 00:08:49.940 --> 00:08:52.059 shifts in mind, let's dive into the science. 00:08:52.279 --> 00:08:54.259 The article points to some foundational research 00:08:54.259 --> 00:08:56.419 that still holds significant weight. Yeah, some 00:08:56.419 --> 00:08:58.899 classic stuff. What did that Cornell work from 00:08:58.899 --> 00:09:02.120 Soberon and Van Amburg back in 2013 find? And 00:09:02.120 --> 00:09:05.340 why is it still so relevant today for every dairy 00:09:05.340 --> 00:09:08.179 producer listening? Ah, the Cornell study. It 00:09:08.179 --> 00:09:11.000 really is a cornerstone of modern calf rearing 00:09:11.000 --> 00:09:13.779 science. Its findings remain profoundly relevant 00:09:13.779 --> 00:09:16.100 even over a decade later. So what was the big 00:09:16.100 --> 00:09:19.039 takeaway? What they uncovered was quite compelling. 00:09:19.179 --> 00:09:22.500 It's widely cited. For every kilogram of extra 00:09:22.500 --> 00:09:26.440 pre -weaning average, daily gain ADG, you know, 00:09:26.440 --> 00:09:29.159 weight gain per day before weaning, you could 00:09:29.159 --> 00:09:32.620 expect an impressive 1 ,000 kilograms more milk 00:09:32.620 --> 00:09:35.580 in that animal's first lactation. Wow, 1 ,000 00:09:35.580 --> 00:09:37.759 kilos more milk just from... better early growth. 00:09:37.940 --> 00:09:40.840 Yep. And it's not just correlation. Research 00:09:40.840 --> 00:09:43.460 consistently shows optimizing pre -weaning growth 00:09:43.460 --> 00:09:46.440 directly influences mammary gland tissue development. 00:09:46.659 --> 00:09:48.480 You're basically programming that animal for 00:09:48.480 --> 00:09:50.820 future productivity. Exactly. It provides a clear, 00:09:50.980 --> 00:09:54.179 tangible, powerful economic incentive to maximize 00:09:54.179 --> 00:09:56.799 calf growth during that critical early window. 00:09:56.899 --> 00:09:58.519 It's a foundational science. That sounds like 00:09:58.519 --> 00:10:00.980 an absolute dream scenario. What you do early 00:10:00.980 --> 00:10:03.639 on has such a profound impact later. It does. 00:10:03.799 --> 00:10:06.139 However... The author adds that really important 00:10:06.139 --> 00:10:09.539 caveat. This was controlled university research 00:10:09.539 --> 00:10:12.980 and, quote, your mileage will definitely vary 00:10:12.980 --> 00:10:17.080 on your own farm. Crucial point. Why is it so 00:10:17.080 --> 00:10:19.379 critical for our listeners to remember that distinction 00:10:19.379 --> 00:10:22.769 between the lab and the real world? It's crucial 00:10:22.769 --> 00:10:25.710 because university settings, well, by nature, 00:10:25.870 --> 00:10:27.889 they strive for highly controlled environments. 00:10:28.029 --> 00:10:31.090 They minimize external variables, right, to isolate 00:10:31.090 --> 00:10:33.710 the impact of what they're studying, like a specific 00:10:33.710 --> 00:10:36.230 feed or supplement. Makes sense. But in the real 00:10:36.230 --> 00:10:39.490 world, on your farm, you're grappling with countless 00:10:39.490 --> 00:10:42.070 dynamic variables, fluctuating weather. Heat, 00:10:42.110 --> 00:10:44.970 stress, cold snaps. Exactly. Varying feed quality, 00:10:45.149 --> 00:10:47.409 batch to batch, different genetics, unpredictable 00:10:47.409 --> 00:10:50.889 disease challenges, labor availability, consistency. 00:10:52.139 --> 00:10:54.600 It's complex. So the potential is there, but 00:10:54.600 --> 00:10:57.019 achieving it isn't guaranteed. Right. The Cornell 00:10:57.019 --> 00:10:59.220 research establishes the potential. The principle, 00:10:59.399 --> 00:11:02.080 early growth impacts future milk. But hitting 00:11:02.080 --> 00:11:04.419 those exact numbers on a commercial farm, it 00:11:04.419 --> 00:11:07.340 requires meticulous, adaptable management and 00:11:07.340 --> 00:11:09.559 a deep understanding of your own specific farm's 00:11:09.559 --> 00:11:12.440 conditions. So the positive impact is real, but 00:11:12.440 --> 00:11:14.879 the exact amount might differ based on your farm. 00:11:14.980 --> 00:11:18.100 Precisely. It's a goal to strive for, but your 00:11:18.100 --> 00:11:21.320 path to get there will be unique. Okay, but beyond 00:11:21.320 --> 00:11:23.299 the long -term benefits, what about the immediate 00:11:23.299 --> 00:11:26.720 costs of sickness? The article highlights Dubrovsky's 00:11:26.720 --> 00:11:30.059 2020 work, Journal of Dairy Science, on BRD treatment 00:11:30.059 --> 00:11:33.279 costs, bovine respiratory disease. Yes, BRD. 00:11:33.600 --> 00:11:35.899 A major headache for many. And this cost range 00:11:35.899 --> 00:11:38.519 isn't small or fixed, is it? It seems to fluctuate 00:11:38.519 --> 00:11:41.100 wildly. It must be incredibly frustrating for 00:11:41.100 --> 00:11:43.340 producers trying to budget. Oh, absolutely. One 00:11:43.340 --> 00:11:45.120 of the most eye -opening things about this research 00:11:45.120 --> 00:11:47.759 is that sheer variability you mentioned. Dubrovsky's 00:11:47.759 --> 00:11:50.100 study found BRD treatment costs ranging from 00:11:50.100 --> 00:11:55.080 a low of, get this, $42 to a high of $395 per 00:11:55.080 --> 00:11:58.600 case. Two to almost 400. That's a massive difference. 00:11:58.740 --> 00:12:01.620 Huge. A real chasm between what you might call 00:12:01.620 --> 00:12:04.840 a manageable expense for a mild case and a profit 00:12:04.840 --> 00:12:07.799 killer for a severe, complicated one. What drives 00:12:07.799 --> 00:12:10.480 that variability? Factors like speed of diagnosis. 00:12:10.639 --> 00:12:13.220 Was it caught early? The specific bug involved. 00:12:13.600 --> 00:12:16.340 Was it susceptible to the first treatment? Did 00:12:16.340 --> 00:12:18.799 it escalate to full pneumonia, needing aggressive, 00:12:19.100 --> 00:12:21.860 repeated, costly interventions? Multiple drugs, 00:12:22.159 --> 00:12:25.120 longer withdrawals, more labor. Exactly. This 00:12:25.120 --> 00:12:28.340 wide range makes it crystal clear. Preventing 00:12:28.340 --> 00:12:31.899 even one severe BRD case can mean significant 00:12:31.899 --> 00:12:34.860 savings. It really strengthens the argument for 00:12:34.860 --> 00:12:37.179 upfront prevention. Definitely. It forces you 00:12:37.179 --> 00:12:39.840 to ask, are you willing to gamble on being at 00:12:39.840 --> 00:12:41.980 the low end of that range? Or would you rather 00:12:41.980 --> 00:12:44.340 invest strategically to avoid the problem altogether? 00:12:44.960 --> 00:12:48.399 Makes sense. And what about probiotics and prebiotics? 00:12:48.580 --> 00:12:51.419 The article mentions research on biotics, probiotics 00:12:51.419 --> 00:12:53.779 being the live good bugs, prebiotics being food 00:12:53.779 --> 00:12:55.919 for them is becoming more nuanced. Right. This 00:12:55.919 --> 00:12:57.700 might surprise some who've heard mixed messages. 00:12:57.759 --> 00:12:59.840 Sometimes they're a miracle cure, sometimes a 00:12:59.840 --> 00:13:02.519 waste of money. Indeed. The traditional view 00:13:02.519 --> 00:13:05.419 has sometimes been, let's say, oversimplified. 00:13:05.740 --> 00:13:08.360 That leads to those mixed messages. But what's 00:13:08.360 --> 00:13:11.539 compelling from the new robust data on both pro 00:13:11.539 --> 00:13:14.500 and prebiotics is that it consistently shows 00:13:14.500 --> 00:13:18.379 advantages in daily gain and overall animal health. 00:13:18.559 --> 00:13:20.960 So they do work. Well, this new understanding 00:13:20.960 --> 00:13:23.950 positions them not as standalone. miracle cures, 00:13:24.009 --> 00:13:25.830 right? They won't magically solve everything. 00:13:26.049 --> 00:13:29.009 Instead, they're becoming recognized as integral 00:13:29.009 --> 00:13:32.389 components within a comprehensive, well -structured 00:13:32.389 --> 00:13:35.129 calf management system. Part of the bigger picture. 00:13:35.389 --> 00:13:38.210 Exactly. They won't fix poor colostrum, bad housing, 00:13:38.330 --> 00:13:40.990 inconsistent feeding, but they work by bolstering 00:13:40.990 --> 00:13:44.110 the calf's gut microbiome, fortifying immune 00:13:44.110 --> 00:13:47.169 defenses. Improving nutrient absorption, building 00:13:47.169 --> 00:13:50.610 resilience. Precisely. So you integrate them 00:13:50.610 --> 00:13:53.429 into a broader strategy to proactively support 00:13:53.429 --> 00:13:56.570 health and growth, moving beyond just reacting 00:13:56.570 --> 00:13:59.210 to disease after it happens. So a valuable piece 00:13:59.210 --> 00:14:01.289 of the puzzle, but not the whole solution. You 00:14:01.289 --> 00:14:03.110 got it. They optimize an already good foundation. 00:14:03.490 --> 00:14:06.529 Okay, now for the math. If you're seriously considering 00:14:06.529 --> 00:14:10.070 that $35 per calf nutrition investment, the article 00:14:10.070 --> 00:14:12.629 meticulously breaks it down. Potential returns. 00:14:12.950 --> 00:14:14.950 The part everyone wants to hear. Exactly. What 00:14:14.950 --> 00:14:17.990 are we looking at? Revenue? Cost savings? At 00:14:17.990 --> 00:14:20.509 least on paper. Does it truly pencil out? On 00:14:20.509 --> 00:14:22.929 paper, the numbers are indeed very impressive. 00:14:23.149 --> 00:14:25.250 And they're designed to grab your attention for 00:14:25.250 --> 00:14:28.629 good reason. Based on that Cornell research linking 00:14:28.629 --> 00:14:33.090 early ADG to future milk and factoring in current 00:14:33.090 --> 00:14:35.710 milk prices, you're looking at a potential milk 00:14:35.710 --> 00:14:40.029 revenue gain of around $485 per cow, first lactation. 00:14:40.129 --> 00:14:43.289 Nearly $500 extra milk revenue? Okay. That's 00:14:43.289 --> 00:14:45.590 significant, attributed mainly to optimizing 00:14:45.590 --> 00:14:48.190 that early growth. Then there's disease cost 00:14:48.190 --> 00:14:50.429 reduction. Which we know is highly variable. 00:14:50.610 --> 00:14:52.789 Super variable. Could be zero on a really well 00:14:52.789 --> 00:14:56.429 -managed farm or easily $100 or more if BRD has 00:14:56.429 --> 00:14:58.610 been a persistent, costly issue for you. Right. 00:14:58.990 --> 00:15:00.610 And don't forget feed efficiency improvements, 00:15:00.929 --> 00:15:04.190 estimated at another $15 to $20 in savings over 00:15:04.190 --> 00:15:06.389 that critical pre -weaning period. So you add 00:15:06.389 --> 00:15:09.190 it all up. More milk, less disease cost, better 00:15:09.190 --> 00:15:11.529 feed efficiency. The total potential return looks 00:15:11.529 --> 00:15:13.990 very promising on the surface. Makes that $35 00:15:13.990 --> 00:15:17.269 investment seem like, well, a no -brainer. Paints 00:15:17.269 --> 00:15:19.429 a very compelling picture. And this is a critical, 00:15:19.570 --> 00:15:22.090 but the author emphasizes, they've seen operations 00:15:22.090 --> 00:15:24.470 where this pencils out beautifully, delivers 00:15:24.470 --> 00:15:26.730 on the promise, and others where it makes absolutely 00:15:26.730 --> 00:15:29.529 no difference whatsoever. The million -dollar 00:15:29.529 --> 00:15:32.070 question. This highlights that simply spending 00:15:32.070 --> 00:15:35.529 the $35 isn't enough. How it's done matters just 00:15:35.529 --> 00:15:37.690 as much, maybe more. This brings up that crucial 00:15:37.690 --> 00:15:40.669 question. Why such a stark difference in results? 00:15:41.529 --> 00:15:43.509 For what seems like a straightforward investment. 00:15:43.909 --> 00:15:46.470 Yeah, why? It's the critical distinction between 00:15:46.470 --> 00:15:49.190 just throwing money at a problem hoping it goes 00:15:49.190 --> 00:15:52.490 away versus strategically investing in a solution 00:15:52.490 --> 00:15:54.769 that's integrated into a well -managed system. 00:15:55.080 --> 00:15:57.539 Ah, the system again. The operation's reporting 00:15:57.539 --> 00:15:59.820 great returns. They aren't just buying a product. 00:15:59.960 --> 00:16:02.019 They're integrating it into a comprehensive, 00:16:02.080 --> 00:16:05.580 holistic system of calf care. So the $35 isn't 00:16:05.580 --> 00:16:08.539 a magic wand? Not at all. It's a component. If 00:16:08.539 --> 00:16:10.700 your foundational management colostrum quality 00:16:10.700 --> 00:16:13.700 and delivery, proper ventilation, clean housing, 00:16:13.919 --> 00:16:15.960 consistent feeding protocols, if those aren't 00:16:15.960 --> 00:16:18.539 up to par. That $35 investment just disappears. 00:16:18.980 --> 00:16:21.399 Pretty much, without a trace. The underlying 00:16:21.399 --> 00:16:23.860 issues are too big for a supplement alone to 00:16:23.860 --> 00:16:26.799 overcome. It really underscores that the context 00:16:26.799 --> 00:16:29.740 of the farm's overall management, the quality 00:16:29.740 --> 00:16:32.769 of those basics, It's paramount to realizing 00:16:32.769 --> 00:16:35.950 any return. Build on a solid foundation. Don't 00:16:35.950 --> 00:16:38.470 use supplements to paper over cracks. Exactly. 00:16:38.649 --> 00:16:41.129 Will said. That leads us perfectly to the real 00:16:41.129 --> 00:16:43.970 talk from real farms. The article shares some 00:16:43.970 --> 00:16:46.590 invaluable anonymous insights. Yeah, the boots 00:16:46.590 --> 00:16:48.690 on the ground perspective. Like that mid -sized 00:16:48.690 --> 00:16:51.649 Wisconsin operation. They saw their average daily 00:16:51.649 --> 00:16:54.590 game improve from a respectable 1 .4 pounds per 00:16:54.590 --> 00:16:58.090 day to an impressive 1 .8. That's a huge jump. 00:16:58.289 --> 00:17:00.960 Huge jump. What was their secret? And what was 00:17:00.960 --> 00:17:02.600 their honest take on where that improvement really 00:17:02.600 --> 00:17:04.960 came from? Yeah, this Wisconsin story is compelling. 00:17:05.240 --> 00:17:08.380 And what's fascinating is their pragmatic, holistic 00:17:08.380 --> 00:17:12.279 approach. And critically, their honesty. They 00:17:12.279 --> 00:17:14.200 weren't just throwing supplements at problems 00:17:14.200 --> 00:17:16.900 in isolation. They implemented a truly systematic 00:17:16.900 --> 00:17:19.900 approach. There's that word again. It keeps coming 00:17:19.900 --> 00:17:23.259 up. Yes, targeted nutrition, likely including 00:17:23.259 --> 00:17:26.319 some of those $35 type investments, but simultaneously. 00:17:27.240 --> 00:17:30.279 They significantly upgraded colostrum protocols, 00:17:30.700 --> 00:17:34.400 ensuring optimal quality, quantity, timing. The 00:17:34.400 --> 00:17:37.400 improved hutch ventilation, massive for reducing 00:17:37.400 --> 00:17:39.960 respiratory issues. And they started consistently 00:17:39.960 --> 00:17:42.859 tracking growth data, monitoring progress, making 00:17:42.859 --> 00:17:44.859 timely adjustments. So what was their honest 00:17:44.859 --> 00:17:46.900 take? Where did the gain come from? Their honest 00:17:46.900 --> 00:17:49.049 take. They couldn't tell you exactly how much 00:17:49.049 --> 00:17:52.849 of that jump, 1 .4 to 1 .8 pounds day ADG, came 00:17:52.849 --> 00:17:56.210 specifically from the $35 nutrition program versus 00:17:56.210 --> 00:17:58.250 all the other management improvements. Interesting. 00:17:58.390 --> 00:18:00.630 And the kicker, they didn't care. Huh. Why? Because 00:18:00.630 --> 00:18:03.190 the entire system got better. This suggests that 00:18:03.190 --> 00:18:05.849 $35 investment is often a catalyst within a holistic 00:18:05.849 --> 00:18:08.690 strategy. It helps optimize a system that's already 00:18:08.690 --> 00:18:10.910 being improved across multiple fronts. Not a 00:18:10.910 --> 00:18:12.890 standalone fix. Right. It's about cumulative 00:18:12.890 --> 00:18:15.609 positive changes. Every piece of the puzzle contributes. 00:18:16.029 --> 00:18:18.509 This systematic approach brings us to a key point 00:18:18.509 --> 00:18:21.309 the article emphasizes repeatedly. Implementation 00:18:21.309 --> 00:18:23.930 is everything. Absolutely everything. What did 00:18:23.930 --> 00:18:26.480 the article highlight about... quality, strain 00:18:26.480 --> 00:18:29.140 specificity, and timing for these nutritional 00:18:29.140 --> 00:18:31.519 tools? Because it sounds like just buying any 00:18:31.519 --> 00:18:33.579 old probiotic off the shelf isn't going to cut 00:18:33.579 --> 00:18:36.299 it. No, definitely not. And this raises that 00:18:36.299 --> 00:18:39.980 critical question. Why do some operations spend 00:18:39.980 --> 00:18:42.779 good money on generic stuff and not get those 00:18:42.779 --> 00:18:45.400 research trial results? Yeah, why? The article 00:18:45.400 --> 00:18:49.140 makes it crystal clear. Quality matters. Strain 00:18:49.140 --> 00:18:52.650 specificity matters immensely. And timing is 00:18:52.650 --> 00:18:55.269 paramount. It's not just what you use, but how 00:18:55.269 --> 00:18:57.930 you use it. Give me an example. Okay, probiotics. 00:18:58.710 --> 00:19:00.430 Different strains are effective for different 00:19:00.430 --> 00:19:02.670 purposes, right, in different environments. A 00:19:02.670 --> 00:19:05.069 generic one might not have the specific strains 00:19:05.069 --> 00:19:08.049 proven for calves. Or it might not be made or 00:19:08.049 --> 00:19:10.190 delivered in a way that ensures the live cultures 00:19:10.190 --> 00:19:12.490 are actually viable when they reach the gut. 00:19:12.730 --> 00:19:15.430 Dead bugs don't do much good. Exactly. And timing 00:19:15.430 --> 00:19:17.730 is critical. Giving a gut health supplement when 00:19:17.730 --> 00:19:20.089 the calf's already got a raging infection, often 00:19:20.089 --> 00:19:22.609 too late for prevention. So understand the specific 00:19:22.609 --> 00:19:25.069 product, ensure quality, integrate it precisely. 00:19:25.509 --> 00:19:28.329 That's it. Without proper implementation, even 00:19:28.329 --> 00:19:31.130 a great product can be a wasted investment. Leaves 00:19:31.130 --> 00:19:34.670 producers frustrated, skeptical. And a calf nutritionist 00:19:34.670 --> 00:19:37.210 quoted in the article sums it up perfectly. A 00:19:37.210 --> 00:19:40.289 guiding principle for you, the listener. Supplements 00:19:40.289 --> 00:19:43.650 are fine -tuning tools, not foundation fixes. 00:19:44.009 --> 00:19:47.309 Get the basics right first. Colostrum, housing, 00:19:47.630 --> 00:19:50.630 feeding consistency, then talk about additives. 00:19:50.769 --> 00:19:53.009 This seems fundamental, almost a prerequisite. 00:19:53.190 --> 00:19:54.930 It absolutely is fundamental. Perhaps one of 00:19:54.930 --> 00:19:56.470 the most important takeaways from this whole 00:19:56.470 --> 00:19:58.769 deep dive. Like building a house. Exactly like 00:19:58.769 --> 00:20:00.309 building a house. You wouldn't put expensive 00:20:00.309 --> 00:20:03.349 wallpaper on crumbling walls, right? Or install 00:20:03.349 --> 00:20:06.109 fancy climate control with a leaky roof and drafty 00:20:06.109 --> 00:20:08.349 windows? No, you fix the foundation first. Right. 00:20:08.450 --> 00:20:10.910 Ensure the foundation's solid, framing strong, 00:20:11.289 --> 00:20:13.930 roof is sound. Then you focus on the enhancements, 00:20:13.950 --> 00:20:16.509 the sophisticated systems. So in calf rearing, 00:20:16.650 --> 00:20:19.829 the basics are the foundation. Colostrum, ventilation, 00:20:20.269 --> 00:20:23.809 housing, consistent feeding. That's your essential, 00:20:23.990 --> 00:20:27.009 non -negotiable foundation. If those aren't meticulously 00:20:27.009 --> 00:20:29.049 dialed in. Investing in expensive supplements 00:20:29.049 --> 00:20:31.420 is pointless. It's like trying to fine -tune 00:20:31.420 --> 00:20:33.859 an engine that's missing spark plugs. It might 00:20:33.859 --> 00:20:35.559 make a tiny difference, maybe, but you're not 00:20:35.559 --> 00:20:37.460 addressing the root cause of poor performance 00:20:37.460 --> 00:20:39.660 or health issues. Supplements optimize a good 00:20:39.660 --> 00:20:42.200 system, push it to great. Or great to exceptional. 00:20:42.440 --> 00:20:44.720 Yeah. They don't salvage a failing system or 00:20:44.720 --> 00:20:47.579 compensate for glaring deficiencies. It's an 00:20:47.579 --> 00:20:51.240 investment in efficiency, not a bailout for neglect. 00:20:51.960 --> 00:20:53.980 It's also important to acknowledge that what 00:20:53.980 --> 00:20:56.859 works brilliantly in one place doesn't always 00:20:56.859 --> 00:20:59.000 translate perfectly elsewhere. Oh, definitely 00:20:59.000 --> 00:21:01.259 not. The article wisely touches on geography 00:21:01.259 --> 00:21:04.900 and scale. Reality checks. How do these factors 00:21:04.900 --> 00:21:07.319 significantly influence the effectiveness, even 00:21:07.319 --> 00:21:09.599 the type of these programs? Excellent point. 00:21:09.680 --> 00:21:11.940 It's remarkable how much external factors can 00:21:11.940 --> 00:21:14.359 alter success and even what kind of investment 00:21:14.359 --> 00:21:17.650 makes sense. Climate stress, local disease pressure, 00:21:18.009 --> 00:21:21.849 feed costs. They vary immensely region to region. 00:21:22.049 --> 00:21:24.529 So what works in Vermont might not work in Texas. 00:21:24.869 --> 00:21:27.069 Exactly. Vermont might focus on winter respiratory 00:21:27.069 --> 00:21:30.170 issues. Yeah. Texas. Extreme heat stress, humidity, 00:21:30.450 --> 00:21:32.470 different digestive challenges become bigger 00:21:32.470 --> 00:21:34.970 factors. The article gives examples. Yeah, good 00:21:34.970 --> 00:21:38.150 ones. Upper Midwest, respiratory challenges are 00:21:38.150 --> 00:21:41.170 common. So pathogen binding strategies or immune 00:21:41.170 --> 00:21:43.819 boosters. Targeting respiratory health makes 00:21:43.819 --> 00:21:47.700 sense. Down south, focus might shift to additives 00:21:47.700 --> 00:21:51.079 for heat stress, rehydration, digestive efficiency 00:21:51.079 --> 00:21:53.559 to combat heat impacts on appetite and absorption. 00:21:53.900 --> 00:21:55.680 And California is different again? California's 00:21:55.680 --> 00:21:58.460 Central Valley unique environment, dust, often 00:21:58.460 --> 00:22:01.460 large -scale, high -density operations. Different 00:22:01.460 --> 00:22:03.700 challenges than Wisconsin's smaller, more traditional 00:22:03.700 --> 00:22:06.180 setups. So you have to tailor the strategy to 00:22:06.180 --> 00:22:08.779 your specific geography. Absolutely. A one -size 00:22:08.779 --> 00:22:11.900 -fits -all approach. rarely optimal. And scale 00:22:11.900 --> 00:22:14.799 also plays a significant role. The 1 ,000 cow 00:22:14.799 --> 00:22:17.500 dairies versus the sub -300 ones. Fundamentally 00:22:17.500 --> 00:22:19.519 different realities and resources. How does that 00:22:19.519 --> 00:22:21.920 impact their approach to this $35 investment? 00:22:22.319 --> 00:22:24.900 Scale absolutely matters. It dictates feasibility 00:22:24.900 --> 00:22:27.880 and implementation. Fewer than 300 cows often 00:22:27.880 --> 00:22:29.539 means different economics, labor constraints, 00:22:29.859 --> 00:22:32.410 logistics. Compared to the big guys. Right. The 00:22:32.410 --> 00:22:34.250 larger operations, they often have the capital 00:22:34.250 --> 00:22:37.309 for automated feeding systems. That allows for 00:22:37.309 --> 00:22:40.529 incredibly precise, consistent delivery of nutrition 00:22:40.529 --> 00:22:43.490 and supplements. Plus, sophisticated monitoring. 00:22:43.869 --> 00:22:46.690 So they can maximize the return better. Potentially, 00:22:46.769 --> 00:22:49.250 yes. Because you ensure the product is delivered 00:22:49.250 --> 00:22:52.900 exactly as intended, every time. Smaller operations 00:22:52.900 --> 00:22:55.619 might need simpler, robust, highly effective 00:22:55.619 --> 00:22:58.779 protocols without huge tech investments. Simpler 00:22:58.779 --> 00:23:01.599 daily doses, maybe fewer interventions, but high 00:23:01.599 --> 00:23:04.779 -impact ones. Exactly. Find what fits your operation's 00:23:04.779 --> 00:23:08.039 size, labor, infrastructure, and ability to execute 00:23:08.039 --> 00:23:10.779 consistently. A blanket recommendation just doesn't 00:23:10.779 --> 00:23:13.220 work. Finally, the article courageously presents 00:23:13.220 --> 00:23:15.460 some uncomfortable truths. Yeah, the tough love 00:23:15.460 --> 00:23:17.980 section. the candid realities farmers need to 00:23:17.980 --> 00:23:20.519 confront when evaluating these programs what 00:23:20.519 --> 00:23:22.599 are these hard -hitting insights well one of 00:23:22.599 --> 00:23:24.799 the most impactful parts is this brutal honesty 00:23:24.799 --> 00:23:27.099 every farmer needs to assess this critically 00:23:27.099 --> 00:23:29.859 maybe with their vet or nutritionist first uncomfortable 00:23:29.859 --> 00:23:32.859 truth some farms simply should not be spending 00:23:32.859 --> 00:23:35.140 extra on calf nutrition supplements if their 00:23:35.140 --> 00:23:38.220 fundamental management is lacking harsh but necessary 00:23:38.220 --> 00:23:41.579 absolutely if your calf mortality is consistently 00:23:41.579 --> 00:23:46.000 high due to basic glaring issues Poor colostrum, 00:23:46.140 --> 00:23:49.900 draftier, unsanitary housing, bad ventilation 00:23:49.900 --> 00:23:52.819 leading to constant respiratory problems. Supplements 00:23:52.819 --> 00:23:55.279 won't fix that? Nope. You'd be treating symptoms, 00:23:55.460 --> 00:24:00.259 not causes. That $35. Far, far better invested 00:24:00.259 --> 00:24:03.000 in fixing those core foundational practices first. 00:24:03.220 --> 00:24:05.500 Like pouring premium fuel in an engine with a 00:24:05.500 --> 00:24:08.119 cracked block. Perfect analogy. Won't make it 00:24:08.119 --> 00:24:10.839 run better, just wasting resources. Fix the fundamentals 00:24:10.839 --> 00:24:14.059 first. Always. And this brings up another equally 00:24:14.059 --> 00:24:16.519 important uncomfortable truth. Okay. Not every 00:24:16.519 --> 00:24:18.619 calf responds the same way. Expecting uniform 00:24:18.619 --> 00:24:21.000 results across the whole herd. It's unrealistic. 00:24:21.400 --> 00:24:23.140 Right. That's critical expectation management 00:24:23.140 --> 00:24:25.460 for you, the listener. Totally. Genetics matter 00:24:25.460 --> 00:24:28.460 hugely. Some calves are just predisposed to better 00:24:28.460 --> 00:24:31.019 growth or health. Birth weight matters. Health 00:24:31.019 --> 00:24:33.619 status at birth is paramount. So a weak calf 00:24:33.619 --> 00:24:35.740 at birth might not show the same gains. Even 00:24:35.740 --> 00:24:37.880 with the best program, maybe not the same dramatic 00:24:37.880 --> 00:24:39.859 results as a vigorous calf that hits the ground 00:24:39.859 --> 00:24:41.940 running. So you optimize for the herd average, 00:24:42.140 --> 00:24:44.200 aim for overall improvement. But accept some 00:24:44.200 --> 00:24:46.839 variability. Right. Understand that variability, 00:24:47.299 --> 00:24:50.839 manage frustration, appreciate the overall positive 00:24:50.839 --> 00:24:53.859 impact, even if some individuals lag. It's about 00:24:53.859 --> 00:24:56.819 collective improvement. So after all that incredibly 00:24:56.819 --> 00:25:00.920 detailed analysis, those candid realities, what's 00:25:00.920 --> 00:25:03.119 the key takeaway for a farmer listening today? 00:25:03.400 --> 00:25:05.059 Yeah, let's bring it home. The article gives 00:25:05.059 --> 00:25:08.359 a clear Monday morning action list, crucial bottom 00:25:08.359 --> 00:25:10.839 lines we can all use. Where should listeners 00:25:10.839 --> 00:25:13.380 focus their efforts to really get the most out 00:25:13.380 --> 00:25:15.880 of their CAF program now? Great question. This 00:25:15.880 --> 00:25:17.539 isn't just theory. It's practical application 00:25:17.539 --> 00:25:20.059 you can start tomorrow morning. First and foremost, 00:25:20.220 --> 00:25:22.619 track those calf weights religiously. Why is 00:25:22.619 --> 00:25:25.339 that number one? Because calves gaining 1 .8 00:25:25.339 --> 00:25:28.160 pounds or more daily before weaning are demonstrably 00:25:28.160 --> 00:25:30.160 set up for that extra 1 ,100 pounds of milk. 00:25:30.480 --> 00:25:32.640 versus lactation. Which translates to? About 00:25:32.640 --> 00:25:35.240 $500 more revenue per cow at today's prices. 00:25:35.640 --> 00:25:38.380 NAHMS benchmark data clearly shows hitting 1 00:25:38.380 --> 00:25:41.960 .5 to 1 .8 pounds a day, ADG, separates the good 00:25:41.960 --> 00:25:43.819 from the mediocre. If you're not tracking, you're 00:25:43.819 --> 00:25:45.619 guessing. And potentially leaving significant 00:25:45.619 --> 00:25:48.019 money on the table. Invest in scales, invest 00:25:48.019 --> 00:25:50.660 in consistency, measure it. That measurable data 00:25:50.660 --> 00:25:52.700 is crucial. Okay, what's number two on the action 00:25:52.700 --> 00:25:55.799 list? Second, get smart about your disease costs 00:25:55.799 --> 00:25:58.589 and not just meds. Everything involved. Document 00:25:58.589 --> 00:26:02.430 everything. Document every single BRD case or 00:26:02.430 --> 00:26:06.069 other major illness. Associated costs, antibiotic 00:26:06.069 --> 00:26:09.309 price, yes, but also syringes, needles, labor 00:26:09.309 --> 00:26:11.430 hours, pulling and treating, potential future 00:26:11.430 --> 00:26:13.930 productivity impact, cost of disposal if you 00:26:13.930 --> 00:26:15.890 lose one. You can't improve what you don't measure. 00:26:15.990 --> 00:26:18.710 Exactly. The article highlights strategic colostrum 00:26:18.710 --> 00:26:21.289 and targeted supplements done right can cut treatment 00:26:21.289 --> 00:26:24.130 bills in half. Half. That's huge. Think what 00:26:24.130 --> 00:26:27.400 that means. Money saved, yes, but also. Precious 00:26:27.400 --> 00:26:30.299 labor hours. Less time treating sick calves equals 00:26:30.299 --> 00:26:33.119 more time on profitable work. Or maybe just more 00:26:33.119 --> 00:26:36.019 rest. That time saving is huge, especially now. 00:26:36.160 --> 00:26:38.940 What about feed efficiency? Absolutely. Third, 00:26:39.119 --> 00:26:41.819 actively seek to boost feed efficiency. The article 00:26:41.819 --> 00:26:44.220 points to proven tools like specific probiotics, 00:26:44.279 --> 00:26:47.259 MOS, those man and oligosaccharides that bind 00:26:47.259 --> 00:26:49.920 bad bacteria. These can lead to a 10 % improvement 00:26:49.920 --> 00:26:51.799 in feed efficiency. What's that mean in dollars? 00:26:51.940 --> 00:26:55.500 Over $180 in savings per calf during that critical 00:26:55.500 --> 00:26:59.089 pre -weaning phase. $180 saved per calf just 00:26:59.089 --> 00:27:01.369 from better feed use. Stays right in your pocket. 00:27:01.509 --> 00:27:04.109 Helping calves extract more nutrients, less waste, 00:27:04.250 --> 00:27:07.650 better use of costly inputs, optimize every bite. 00:27:07.789 --> 00:27:09.730 And in this market with those crazy replacement 00:27:09.730 --> 00:27:12.509 costs. Which brings us to number four. Every 00:27:12.509 --> 00:27:15.609 calf you save matters more now than ever before. 00:27:15.869 --> 00:27:19.519 That $3 ,010 heifer costs again. Precisely. Plus, 00:27:19.599 --> 00:27:22.259 scarce expensive labor. Preventing death loss 00:27:22.259 --> 00:27:24.339 isn't just good animal care anymore, though that's 00:27:24.339 --> 00:27:27.720 always paramount. It's smart economics, business 00:27:27.720 --> 00:27:30.299 survival. A dead calf is a massive financial 00:27:30.299 --> 00:27:33.940 drain. Huge drain. Lost animal, setback to future 00:27:33.940 --> 00:27:36.359 herd productivity, direct loss of a revenue stream 00:27:36.359 --> 00:27:38.720 two years in the making. Preventing that loss 00:27:38.720 --> 00:27:40.559 is a direct investment in your farm's financial 00:27:40.559 --> 00:27:43.670 future. And finally, number five. You simply 00:27:43.670 --> 00:27:46.250 have to adapt to the new reality. The FDA restrictions, 00:27:46.829 --> 00:27:50.690 labor costs. Those FDA antibiotic rules, soaring 00:27:50.690 --> 00:27:53.529 labor, tight margins. Proactive nutrition and 00:27:53.529 --> 00:27:55.630 robust health programs aren't just nice -to -haves 00:27:55.630 --> 00:27:57.829 anymore. They're survival tools. The article 00:27:57.829 --> 00:28:00.869 makes it abundantly clear. They're survival tools 00:28:00.869 --> 00:28:04.650 for 2025 and beyond. The landscape has fundamentally 00:28:04.650 --> 00:28:07.549 changed. Successful operations will strategically 00:28:07.549 --> 00:28:10.349 invest in prevention, build resilience from the 00:28:10.349 --> 00:28:12.950 ground up. Not rely on reactive treatments that 00:28:12.950 --> 00:28:15.430 are harder to access and more expensive now. 00:28:15.650 --> 00:28:19.529 Exactly. Build a robust system that thrives despite 00:28:19.529 --> 00:28:21.869 these new challenges. So the ultimate bottom 00:28:21.869 --> 00:28:24.630 line here for every producer listening, it's 00:28:24.630 --> 00:28:29.000 strategic. Is there a $35 advantage? Well. Yes. 00:28:29.079 --> 00:28:31.940 On some farms, absolutely. The data shows incredible 00:28:31.940 --> 00:28:35.539 returns are possible. But on others, that money 00:28:35.539 --> 00:28:37.500 might actually generate better returns fixing 00:28:37.500 --> 00:28:40.000 basic management first. Honest assessment is 00:28:40.000 --> 00:28:42.079 key. Absolutely. An honest, self -critical assessment 00:28:42.079 --> 00:28:44.859 of where your operation truly stands. If you're 00:28:44.859 --> 00:28:46.960 already consistently hitting 1 .8 plus pounds 00:28:46.960 --> 00:28:49.539 of ADG, minimal health issues, excellent foundational 00:28:49.539 --> 00:28:52.019 care, frankly, nutrition supplements probably 00:28:52.019 --> 00:28:53.759 aren't your highest priority right now. Focus 00:28:53.759 --> 00:28:56.140 elsewhere first. Maybe fix labor efficiency. 00:28:56.960 --> 00:28:59.519 improve breeding, optimize feed bunk management, 00:28:59.740 --> 00:29:02.329 but... and this is crucial if you're struggling, 00:29:02.490 --> 00:29:04.990 consistently dealing with respiratory disease, 00:29:05.549 --> 00:29:08.130 calves showing poor growth below benchmarks. 00:29:08.410 --> 00:29:10.569 The targeted nutrition can pay off. And pay off, 00:29:10.849 --> 00:29:13.190 but only if implemented as part of systematic 00:29:13.190 --> 00:29:15.970 improvement, not a standalone magic bullet. Never 00:29:15.970 --> 00:29:18.690 a magic bullet. The real value isn't in any specific 00:29:18.690 --> 00:29:22.130 $35 supplement itself. It's in the time you take 00:29:22.130 --> 00:29:25.049 to objectively analyze your farm's data, understand 00:29:25.049 --> 00:29:27.410 your unique challenges, and figure out exactly 00:29:27.410 --> 00:29:30.289 what your calves truly need to thrive. That's 00:29:30.289 --> 00:29:32.329 what separates the operations thriving in 2025. 00:29:32.650 --> 00:29:34.190 From those that will struggle. This isn't just 00:29:34.190 --> 00:29:36.349 feel good farming. It's dollars and cents strategy 00:29:36.349 --> 00:29:39.549 backed by science, real world data. Your calves 00:29:39.549 --> 00:29:41.690 are either a calculated strategic investment. 00:29:41.890 --> 00:29:45.609 Or they're an unmanaged recurring expense. Which 00:29:45.609 --> 00:29:48.190 camp are you in? Powerful final thoughts. And 00:29:48.190 --> 00:29:50.509 that's probably all the time we have for today's 00:29:50.509 --> 00:29:52.869 deep dive. For more articles, in -depth analyses, 00:29:53.109 --> 00:29:55.269 crucial insights like these, be sure to visit 00:29:55.269 --> 00:29:59.339 www .thebullvine .com. And don't forget to subscribe 00:29:59.339 --> 00:30:01.980 and follow us wherever you get your deep dives. 00:30:02.099 --> 00:30:04.299 We appreciate you tuning in. Thanks for listening.