Cow-Calf Corner | August 18, 2025
Nervous Cattle Markets Struggle with Market Fundamentals
Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist
Feeder cattle prices continue to push to unimaginable highs leaving producers and traders increasingly nervous. Last week, in Oklahoma auctions, 500-pound, M/L #1 steers brought $451.90/cwt. ($2,260/head) and 800-pound, M/L #1 steers were priced at $352.55/cwt. ($2,820/head). All feeder steers (M/L #1) below 1050 pounds brought more than $300/cwt., those below 600 pounds were priced over $400/cwt. and all below 400 pounds were priced over $500/cwt. Feeder cattle prices, especially lightweight calf prices, have moved unseasonally higher this summer.
I sense that there is a growing feeling that this market is a bubble that is about to burst. While I share the anxiety that goes with the current cattle market, it is important to not forget the fundamentals that explain why the market is at this level and what they say about the coming months.
The calculated feeder cattle supply this year is the smallest in available data for both the January and July Cattle reports. The tight feeder supply is the result of declining calf crops. Calf crops have declined the past seven years and are down 8.8 percent from the cyclical peak in 2018. The 2025 U.S. calf crop is the lowest since 1941. The beef cow herd is at a cyclical (maybe) and multi-decade low and is showing little sign of rebuilding. The closure of the Mexican border adds to the ever-tighter feeder cattle supply. The slow decrease in feedlot inventories in the past two years has, to some extent, masked the fact that feeder supplies were continuing to dwindle. I wrote in this newsletter in October 2024 that “The feeder cattle supply is an increasingly hollow ball that will implode at some point.” Current feeder cattle markets are a reflection of that process continuing to evolve.
So, what happens now? Producer psychology appears to be accelerating the process. Auction volumes for feeder cattle in Oklahoma are up 29.2 percent year over year the past four weeks as producers rush to catch the current market. Large numbers of calves that would normally be fall-run calves in two or three months are being sold early – frequently as unweaned calves. For example, the combined auction category for M/L #1 steers had 12.5 percent of calves commented as “unweaned” last week compared to 8.3 percent the same week last year. And this was with a total volume in the category that was up 64.0 percent year over year, meaning that the number of unweaned calves in this one category was up 147.5 percent from one year ago. Early feeder cattle sales are no doubt aided by good forage conditions and strong cattle performance this growing season.
Changing the timing of the fall run of calves may briefly mask the actual feeder supply situation in the country for a few weeks. Feedlot placements will likely be larger through the third quarter than otherwise would have been the case. The likelihood is that feeder cattle volumes in the fourth quarter will drop noticeably. Stocker and feedlot buyers should not expect seasonally lower feeder prices this fall.
The lingering question in the background continues to be that of heifer retention. With still no indication of significant heifer retention, the implication is that tight feeder supplies must get tighter yet in order to begin the process that will lead to eventual herd rebuilding. Herd rebuilding is slow to start and appears to be slow-paced at this time. This suggests that cattle prices will move higher and remain elevated for an extended period of time with a peak that is still in the future.
Current Value of Replacement Heifers
Mark Z. Johnson, Oklahoma State University Extension Beef Cattle Breeding Specialist
There is evidence of an increase in heifer retention with improved drought conditions across much of the Central Plains and summer video auctions reporting a smaller percentage of heifer calves. Retention does not appear to be aggressive. With the calf market on pace for another year of record prices providing incentive, herd rebuilding remains sluggish compared to past cycles. Lingering drought continues to limit forage availability in key regions while high interest rates and the substantial capital required to develop or purchase bred females further suppresses expansion. As well, many producers remain wary of a repeat of the post-2014 market correction, adding a layer of caution to long-term decision-making. Even with bred female values at record highs, relative to calf prices, breds may still be undervalued, a sign of producer hesitation rather than a lack of economic feasibility. An excellent metric to consider when purchasing bred heifers is the number of calves it takes to pay for the purchase. Cattlefax recently reported that in 2025, that figure is projected to average just 2.75 calves, well below the long-term average of 4.5 and far beneath the 2015 peak of 9 calves. This ratio is likely to rise over time, driven by higher bred female prices, moderating calf values, or a combination of both. If feed resources allow, this dynamic suggests that adding females to the herd today may be the best time from a breakeven perspective to expand.
Replacement heifers are expensive; not only with respect to dollars invested but also the expenditure of time and labor involved. Recent market reports indicate 550 pound weaned heifer calves selling for well over $2,000 per head. Those heifers calves are still two years away from weaning their first calf if all goes according to plan. Accordingly, operations looking to add inventory may find a better option of purchasing bred heifers in the current market.
What Should Bred Heifers Be Worth?
Assuming weaned calves remain at a value of $2,000 - $2,500 per head over the next few years, your annual cost of running a cow will largely determine what you should invest in a bred heifer. The annual cost of maintaining a beef cow is highly variable and has increased tremendously over the past 5 years. Variable costs such as fuel, fertilizer and herbicides have been blamed as the primary culprits; however, fixed costs such as equipment, hired labor, and land have increased as well.
Total economic costs associated with U.S. cow-calf production for 2018 were estimated to range from $910 per cow for operations with 500 or more cows to $2,099 per cow for operations with 20–49 cows. These results show significant economies of scale, with costs per cow declining with increased herd size.
Kansas Farm Management Association estimates the annual cost of running a cow to be approximately $1,551 according to data collected in 2024. It is noteworthy that pasture and feed only account for $684 of that total. A more detailed breakdown of the other actual expenses is available in the last article referenced below.
Market fundamentals are strong for a continued robust cattle market until cow inventories start to climb. There is currently not much indication of that happening anytime soon. That being said, what bred heifers are worth to your operation (and how many calves a female needs to raise in order recapture your initial purchase price) will depend on how much profit she nets each year per calf rather than on the gross value of each calf she produces.
References:
- CattleFax: How Many Calves Does It Take? Margin signals continue to point toward cowherd expansion, but the industry’s response
thus far has been measured
- USDA: Economic Research Service
Amber Waves : Larger Beef Cow-Calf Farms Have Lower Costs per Cow Than Smaller Operations - 2024 Enterprise Summary - Beef Cows-Sell Calves - State | AgManager.info
Matching Your Summer Stocker Supplementation Program to Production and Marketing Goals
Paul Beck, Oklahoma State University Cooperative Extension Beef Cattle Nutrition Specialist
In previous articles we discussed supplementation programs and how supplementation rates affect stocker calf performance and efficiency. After understanding how stocker calves respond to different supplementation rates, the next step is matching the right supplement strategy to your forage type, cattle performance goals, and budget.
General Guidelines for Supplementation Rates:
- Low rate (0.2 to 0.3% of body weight):
- Supplement Type: High Protein (38-45% Crude Protein) or moderate protein (25-30% crude protein) oilseed meals or byproduct feeds.
- Useful in late summer when forage protein content limits forage digestion and livestock gains. Feeding a low amount of a high protein supplement provides the rumen a protein boost to support microbial activity and digestion increasing forage intake and animal performance.
- Can be provided 2 to 3 days per week.
- Best for native range and warm-season bunch grasses such as Old World Bluestems.
- Supplement cost: high protein and high-quality ingredients lends to high cost per ton of supplement but low feeding rate make for a low daily cost of supplementation.
- Moderate rate (0.5% of body weight):
- Supplement Type: Moderate protein (25-30% crude protein) byproduct feeds
- Ideal for most of the summer grazing period. Balances energy and protein needs without replacing (substituting) too much forage with high supplementation rates.
- Works well for introduced warm-season pastures like crabgrass or bermudagrass that have adequate protein but have low digestibility and additional energy is needed for adequate performance.
- Can be provided 3 to 5 times per week.
- Cheaper feed ingredients can be used to offset the higher feeding rate.
- High rate (0.75% or more):
- Low to Moderate (14 to 20%) crude protein.
- High substitution rates of supplement for forage intake.
- Can be used to increase stocking rates.
- Should be provided daily or 5-days per week at a minimum.
- May be beneficial during drought or when forage is extremely mature, but cost-effectiveness and potential intake substitution should be considered.
- Feed costs should be managed carefully, but use of grains should be limited to decrease substitution rates and decrease chances of digestive upset.
Final Thoughts
Strategic supplementation during the summer grazing season helps stocker calves meet their growth potential and improves overall herd performance. Work with your local Extension agent or nutritionist to design the best supplementation program to meet your forage base, cattle genetics, and market goals.
Selecting Tall Fescue Varieties for your Environment
Mike Trammell, OSU Cooperative Extension Service Southeast Area Agronomist
Tall fescue is one of the most common forage species in the eastern United States. First recognized in 1931 by E. N. Fergus, a professor and plant breeder at the University of Kentucky, on a Kentucky farm owned by William Suiter. After several years of evaluation, Fergus released the variety of tall fescue known as Kentucky-31 (KY-31) in 1943 which quickly became the forage of choice across the mid-South due to its superior drought tolerance, ability to withstand heavy grazing, and high yield capacity. The agronomic performance of KY-31 is the result of a fungal endophyte living between the cells of the plant. The endophyte found in KY-31 (sometimes called the “wild type” endophyte) produces toxins called ergot alkaloids along with other alkaloids that are beneficial to the plant. The ergot alkaloids can cause detrimental effects that lead to loss of production when animals graze infected plants. These symptoms are collectively called “fescue toxicosis.”
Before selecting an improved forage type variety of tall fescue, understand that there are three distinct types of fescues available: endophyte-infected or wild type KY-31, endophyte free (EF) which contains no endophyte, and varieties of fescue matched with research proven livestock friendly or novel endophytes (NE). For the best combination of agronomic and animal performance attributes, NE tall fescue will usually be the best choice across the Fescue Belt (Figure 1). In this region, KY-31 tall fescue has established itself as the primary cool-season forage plant present in pastures.
Endophyte infection is critical for plant survival across most of the Fescue Belt. Endophyte-free tall fescue is often recommended for situations not requiring a long-lasting pure stand of tall fescue, such as in multispecies forage mixtures; in short crop rotations; or in the most temperate parts of the Fescue Belt (Figure 1). Endophyte-free varieties generally will not tolerate stressful conditions such as drought, constant overgrazing, or insect pressure because they do not contain endophytes. Alternatively, NE varieties perform better than EF varieties under such conditions but are more expensive to establish than KY-31.
Traits for variety comparison include ecotype (summer active or summer dormant), time to maturity and leaf type. Other traits such as seedling vigor are also important. In most variety trials, time to maturity or day of heading is usually presented relative to KY-31. Leaf type is classified as either traditional or soft, with most tall fescue varieties being classified as having a traditional leaf type, which is how the leaf blades of KY-31 are classified. Currently, there is no accepted standardized method among agronomists for assessing and assigning a leaf type, but there are specific visual and tactile differences, although some of these are subjective. In general, livestock find the soft leaf varieties more palatable. While soft leaf types may lead to better animal performance, the importance of management to prevent overgrazing cannot be overemphasized. Seeds with high vigor are important for stand establishment improving a variety’s capability to compete against weeds at seedling stage thus significantly enhancing a successful planting. If your farm environment is located in the dry summer environments of the far western edges of the fescue belt, then the summer dormancy trait will be important for long term persistence.
When planning to establish a new cool-season pasture such as tall fescue, selecting the best varieties for your operation and environment is a straightforward way to improve the chances the planting is successful for years to come. Just like purchasing proven livestock genetics, selecting certified seed of improved varieties is well worth the investment.
Survey of Oklahoma Cattle Producers Regarding Ticks and Tick-Borne Diseases
Jonathon Cammock, OSU Cooperative Extension Livestock Entomologist
The Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Entomology Program is seeking participants
for a study on the impact of ticks on beef and dairy cattle production in Oklahoma.
We are looking for producers who are willing to complete a brief survey, to help us
assess tick and tick-borne disease knowledge and prevalence, and identify preventative
measures taken to protect producers, employees, and livestock from tick bites and
tick-borne diseases. Information collected will be used to develop Extension programming
targeted at your needs as cattle producers. We would appreciate if you could take
the time to participate!
Website: Livestock Entomology
To access the survey if you are interested in participating Questionnaire: Assessment of Oklahoma Cattle Producer’s Knowledge and Awareness of Ticks and Tick-Borne Diseases
Looking Ahead
In upcoming newsletters, we will look at how supplementation rates affect stocker cattle gains and supplemental efficiency and discuss guidelines for choosing the right supplement program based on pasture conditions and production goals.
Upcoming
- Thursday, August 21 – Zoom Webinar - noon to 1 pm
Adaptive vs Continuous Grazing Management: Advantages and Antagonisms – Brian Pugh, Cooperative Extension State Forage Agronomist - Thursday, August 28 – Zoom Webinar - noon to 1 pm
Results of the Statewide Parasite Resistance Study – Dr. Rosslyn Biggs, DVM, Cooperative Extension State Beef Cattle Specialist
To register and review the detailed schedule, visit the Beef Extension website.
Register Online
Missed an article or want to re-read a past article? Previous editions of the Cow-Calf Corner Newsletter are available at Cow-Calf Corner - The Newsletter
If you were forwarded this email and want to get it delivered straight to your email inbox, email Paul Beck (paul.beck@okstate.edu) or Derrell Peel (derrell.peel@okstate.edu) to be added to our email list.