This document discusses dairy beef production, including: 1) Dairy beef calves can be raised on pasture, finishing on forage to produce high-quality beef. Studies show pasture-raised Holstein beef can be more profitable than stocker beef operations. 2) Young dairy calves are usually sold at auction but can also be raised for beef. Proper colostrum and feeding is important for calf health in the first few weeks. 3) Older dairy calves can be finished on pasture by grazing annual ryegrass or clover pastures, gaining over 3 pounds daily without additional feed inputs. Selling feeder cattle before summer reduces costs.

1. A project of the National Center for Appropriate Technology 1-800-346-9140 • www.attra.ncat.org
Dairy Beef
By Anne Fanatico Dairy beef is an opportunity to diversify operations and boost income, especially when production is
NCAT Agriculture pasture-based. This publication discusses production, finishing, niche markets and direct marketing,
Specialist and analyzing profitability.
Published 2000
Updated 2010
by Lee Rinehart, NCAT Introduction
Agriculture Specialist Dairy beef is an opportunity to diversify opera-
tions and boost income, especially when pro-
duction is pasture-based. Since many consum-
Contents ers are interested in lean, naturally-raised beef,
dairy beef also represents an enterprise option
Introduction ......................1
for direct marketing to a niche market. How-
Production .........................1
ever, market research is critical before getting
Forage feeding.................1 started in dairy beef production.
Pasture finishing .............2
It has been estimated that 2.35 million Holstein
Combination pasture/
grain finishing...................3 steers are marketed annually in the U.S. (Schae-
Niche markets and fer, 2005), and dairy beef accounts for about
direct marketing ..............4 18% of all beef and veal marketed in the U.S.
acquired. According to Rulofson et al. (1993),
Analyzing (Lowe and Gereffi, 2009). Until recently, most
a calf needs 4 to 5 percent of its body weight
profitability ........................4 dairy bull calves were sold for veal. However,
in colostrum by the time it is 12 hours old and
Resources ...........................5 dairy calves are also valuable for beef produc-
preferably within 1 to 2 hours. Calves also need
References .........................6 tion. Dairy beef production has the advantage of
milk for the first 3 to 4 weeks of life. They can
being relatively easy to enter and exit compared
be weaned between 4 and 8 weeks of age, so
to other enterprises. For instance, Holstein beef
plan on getting calves on to a calf starter feed as
calves gain weight very efficiently and can pro-
soon as possible, at about 10 days of age. When
duce a high-quality carcass if fed and managed
they are 10 to 20 weeks old, the calves still
correctly (Eng, 2005).
require a high-energy feed. Nurse cows and even
dairy goats have been used by some producers to
Production suckle dairy calves instead of using milk replacer
The Penn State publication, Agricultural Alter- (Nation, 1993). After 20 weeks, more flexibil-
natives: Dairy-beef Production (Comerford et ity in feeding is possible. Forage-feeding, which
al., 2008), describes how young dairy calves includes grazing pastures and feeding conserved
are usually sold through local auctions at 2 to forage, can be used.
5 days old, though they are sometimes sold as
The National Sustainable
Agriculture Information Service,
older animals. Since the health of newly arrived
calves can vary greatly, guidelines are given for
Forage feeding
ATTRA (www.attra.ncat.org), Grazing dairy steers may be a profitable feeding
starting calves out in individual clean stalls with
was developed and is managed option for farmers. According to Lehmkuhler,
by the National Center for electrolytes and a health maintenance program.
Appropriate Technology (NCAT). the expected performance of grazing Holstein
The project is funded through An “all-in, all-out” approach is often used in
steers will vary depending on the grazing sys-
a cooperative agreement with which each batch of calves is treated as a unit
the United States Department tem, forage type, and level and form of sup-
of Agriculture’s Rural Business- from the time of arrival on the farm until depar-
Cooperative Service. Visit the plementation (2005). Forage-feeding Holstein
NCAT website (www.ncat.org/ ture—new animals are not added to the group.
sarc_current.php) for calves up to 850 pounds does not necessarily
more information on The feeding program for Holstein beef calves change how the carcass will grade at slaughter.
our other sustainable
agriculture and depends on the age at which the calves are In addition, steers that are fed forage during the
energy projects.

2. Allan Nation describes how pasture-based Hol-
Receiving program for young dairy calves stein beef production in Mississippi can be more
(Adapted from Boyles et al, no date (a)) profitable than stocker beef. In an article for the
Week 1 – Provide a clean, dry stall with adequate ventilation. Provide a Stockman Grassfarmer, he writes “the growth rate
high-quality milk replacer. Check the navel and dip in iodine (7%) if not dry. of fall-born baby Holstein steers almost perfectly
Inspect the calves for injuries and evidence of diarrhea. Develop a com- matches the seasonal growth rate of annual rye-
prehensive health program including vaccinations with your veterinarian. grass pasture” (Nation, 1991). In Nation’s sce-
Provide a high-quality starter ration around day 5. nario, pasture was fertilized with a high rate of
Weeks 2 to 4 – During this time calves are acclimated to starter feeds and nitrogen, and spring calf gains were more than
can be castrated and dehorned. 3 pounds per day. With the addition of legumes
such as white clover in the pasture, nitrogen fer-
Week 5 – Booster vaccinations for respiratory diseases may be consid- tilization can be significantly reduced or even
ered with additional vaccines for enterotoxemia and the other clostridial eliminated (Gerrish, 2007). Calves were placed
diseases included.
on pasture at 2 months and sold as feeder cattle
Week 6 – Discontinue milk replacer abruptly when calves are consuming by late May—before the summer heat set in. A
adequate starter (2 to 3 pounds) and are healthy. good health program to reduce mortality was
Week 7 – Move to pasture.
critical to profitability.
Pasture finishing
growing period (325 to 700 pounds) and are Finishing is a term that describes feeding an ani-
later switched back to grain, still reach a market mal to a predetermined end weight. In a feedlot,
weight of about 1200 pounds in the same time cattle are fed to achieve an end weight of around
as steers on a constant grain diet (Grant et al., 1150 to 1300 pounds with a carcass grade of
1993). Select or Choice. In pasture finishing, cattle are
Dairy calves typically gain less weight per day grazed on high-quality forages to accomplish
on pasture than do their beef breed counter- the same purpose. This requires strict attention
parts, due to their higher maintenance require- to forage and grazing management because cat-
ments. However, a study in 1997 suggests that, tle typically take longer to finish on grass than
given an improved cool-season pasture (no-till they do on a concentrated feedlot diet.
annual ryegrass) and appropriate supplementa- A project conducted by the Northern New York
tion (including implants), Holstein calves can Agricultural Development Program in 2005
compete with beef breeds, with average daily
gains approaching 2.7 pounds per day (Mur- Related ATTRA publications
phey et al., 1997).
Paddock Design, Fencing and Water Systems
Raising cattle on pasture necessitates manage- for Controlled Grazing
ment decisions about grazing. Controlled graz- Pastures: Sustainable Management
ing or management-intensive rotational grazing
Grass-Based and Seasonal Dairying
(MIG) can increase both plant and animal pro-
duction. Controlled grazing involves grazing and Rotational Grazing
then resting several pastures in sequence. The rest Managed Grazing in Riparian Areas
periods allow plants to recover before they are Pasture, Rangeland, and Grazing Management
grazed again. Significant increases in forage uti- Solar-Powered Livestock Watering Systems
lization are often possible when changing from
Ruminant Nutrition for Graziers
a continuous to a controlled grazing system.
Although an intensive system has initial costs of Cattle Production: Considerations for Pasture-
Based Beef and Dairy Producers
electric fencing and watering investments, as well
as increased management, many farmers report Dairy Production on Pasture: An Introduction
better profitability. See the ATTRA publications to Grass-Based and Seasonal Dairying
Rotational Grazing; Ruminant Nutrition for Gra- Raising Dairy Heifers on Pasture
ziers; Pasture, Rangeland, and Grazing Manage- Beef Marketing Alternatives
ment; and Paddock Design, Fencing and Water Direct Marketing
Systems for Controlled Grazing for detailed infor-
Selling to Restaurants
mation on grazing management.
Page 2 ATTRA Dairy Beef

3. studied the viability of raising Holstein steers on grazing as soon as possible. The calves in the
grass from calfhood to slaughter. New York, like study started off slow, as is expected, and it was
many dairy states, has a surplus of bull calves noted that a better way to start young calves may
that are often not profitable to farmers. The be to place them on pasture with mature cows so
study was conducted to see if these calves could they learn how to eat grass (Buchanan, 2009).
be used to supply the grass-fed market, which is
growing in many parts of the country. Combination
The lessons learned from this trial are promis- pasture/grain finishing
ing for farmers who are thinking about grazing Work from Chester-Jones and DiCostanzo
Holstein steers. According to Brent Buchanan (1996) suggests that grazing works well for
(2009), one of the investigators on the study, Holsteins up to about 700 pounds. After 800
the cattle grew rapidly and responded well to pounds, they generally need a higher-energy
the whole forage diet throughout the finishing ration, such as corn, in order to be able to grade
period. They finished well and, according to a well at slaughter.
taste study, presented a good taste profile; the
grass-fed Holstein beef was preferred over grain- Dairy beef cattle can be finished one of two
fed beef. Maintaining a balanced ration was crit- ways. Many feeders (including large feedlots and
ical to success. One of the problems encountered smaller farmer-feeders) feed a high concentrate
was excessive crude protein in the cool-season ration from weaning all the way to slaughter.
forages and the need to get more energy into the This system takes advantage of the efficiencies
cattle to support growth. Some options to con- inherent in feeding high-energy diets to rumi-
sider might be high-energy forages such as bras- nant animals. A forage-based option is a two-
sicas to allow for more efficient protein usage. phase feeding program, in which a high forage/
The cattle were also fed high-quality hay, low- roughage diet is fed to cattle up to 750 pounds,
quality hay, and wet balage during the feeding and then replaced with a high-energy finishing
period, and Buchanan reports the best gains ration to slaughter. This allows for compensatory
occurred when the cattle had wet balage as part growth in the finishing stage. Chester-Jones and
DiCostanzo (1996) suggest that pasture can be
of their diet.
used during the grazing season with no effect on
Another problem that many farmers may be carcass cutability or the weight at which an ani-
familiar with is getting young calves to start mal reaches choice grade.
Northern New York ag development program grass-fed Holstein steer program
In 2005, Beef Extension Specialists in New York facilitated a demonstration project at the Extension Learning Farm in Canton,
New York, funded by the Northern New York Agricultural Development Program. Northern New York produces high-quality
forage as well as Holstein bull calves, and research exists indicating that Holstein steers make a high-quality beef carcass when
raised under commercial feedlot conditions. However, there is a growing demand for beef finished on an all-forage diet and
raised without growth promotants or feed-based antibiotics. One of the purposes of this project was to determine if grass-fed
Holstein steers can produce meat products that are acceptable to consumers.
In this study, Holstein bull calves were purchased from local dairies. Beginning at 200 lbs. and 300 lbs., animals were intensively
grazed from May through November 2004. At the end of the grazing season, calves were housed in the open-front barn with
cement pad feeding area. Animals from each weight category were randomly assigned to one of three all forage diets: 1) high-
quality baleage; 2) high-quality dry hay; and 3) medium-quality dry hay. The calves were fed all they could eat to maximize their
potential rate of gain. Following the winter feeding period, the calves were again grazed intensively. Harvest of the animals began
on September 7, 2005. At harvest, carcass weight, backfat, intramuscular fat, and rib eye area were measured.
Unlike most beef available in grocery stores today, carcasses were dry-aged for 10 to 14 days or longer, then processed into
vacuum packages and frozen. Consumer data were collected to determine tenderness, flavor, juiciness and overall eating satis-
faction of the product. No respondents indicated flavor was OK or Disappointing.
This project has held considerable interest for farmers and consumers alike. So far, the concept is encouraging as a potentially
viable farming enterprise.
For more information, contact Cornell Cooperative Extension in St. Lawrence County at 315-379-9192.
www.attra.ncat.org ATTRA Page 3

4. Two-phase feeding program Niche markets
(adapted from Chester-Jones and DiCostanzo, 1996) and direct marketing
• From 400 pounds to market weight Niche marketing involves producing and mar-
keting products for a targeted group of individu-
• Phase I – up to 700 pounds; 75% alfalfa hay, silage, or pasture, als, typically those who are dissatisfied with con-
25% corn grain and supplement ventional supply and willing to pay a premium
• Phase II – from 700 pounds to slaughter; 7 to 10% alfalfa hay, and for specialty products. Niche marketing gener-
90 to 93% concentrate finishing ration ally requires more intensive management (i.e.,
accounting for time spent in marketing in addi-
tion to managing an animal herd), more labor,
and is inherently more risky (Thilmany and Sul-
Carcass and meat qualities: lins, 2004).
Holsteins, in particular, are valued by many There are niche markets for beef that is grass-fed
feeders and meat packers because of the consis- to slaughter weight and raised without antibi-
tency of the breed. They have uniform rates of otics or implanted growth hormones, and per-
gain and feed conversion and show predictable haps certified organic. Direct-marketing—sell-
carcass characteristics in terms of yield, grade ing lean dairy beef directly to individuals and
and cutability (Johnson, 1993). However, Hol- restaurants—is a particularly effective way to
steins tend to be discounted in comparison to access these niche markets.
traditional beef breeds. This is likely due to pric-
ing methods that value dairy cattle lower than The SAN publication, How to direct market your
beef cattle, because of their lower dressing per- beef (Holder, 2005), available online at www.
cent, inferior conformation, and a lower per- sare.org/publications/beef.htm, describes in detail
centage of valuable cuts from the rib and loin the considerations in planning and implement-
(Rust and Abney, 2005). ing a direct beef marketing campaign to niche
markets. In addition, ATTRA’s Beef Marketing
Holstein cattle typically have a smaller ribeye Alternatives has more information on marketing
area and less backfat than do beef breeds (Rust beef to niche markets. ATTRA’s Direct Market-
and Abney, 2005). Holstein beef is leaner than ing publication provides further details on the
most beef, yielding a carcass with 25 to 30 per- tasks, challenges, and opportunities a producer
cent less trimmable fat than beef breeds, which faces when marketing farm products.
is important to consumers interested in a low-
fat diet. Holsteins do, however, tend to marble For more information, see the Marketing and
well since fat accumulates inside the muscle as Economics section of Resources at the end of
opposed to outside the muscle. This accounts for this publication.
a quality grade advantage over traditional beef
breeds (Schaefer, 2005). Dairy cattle breeds have
a higher ratio of feed to weight gain than beef
Analyzing profitability
You may want to evaluate a prospective dairy
breeds, thus dairy beef steers usually will not
beef operation from an economic standpoint
produce an acceptable quality carcass if slaugh-
to figure out a break-even price and determine
tered beyond 18 months of age (Comerford et
if raising dairy beef is a viable option for you.
al., 2008). Bartlett (1998) notes that dairy steers
To do this you will need to write a budget. The
have a rate of gain similar to that of traditional
ATTRA publication Grazing Contracts for Live-
beef breeds, but are 10 to 15 percent less feed-
stock contains a simple beef cattle stocker bud-
efficient than beef breeds due to higher mainte-
get you can use for this purpose. Another good
nance requirements.
resource for developing a budget is Stocker Enter-
Cattle finished on pasture have distinct meat prise Budgets for Grass-Based Systems (Schuster,
qualities that are receiving more and more atten- et al., 2001) from the University of Wisconsin.
tion. See ATTRA’s Beef Marketing Alternatives Your local Cooperative Extension Service is also
for a discussion of pasture-finished beef produc- a good source of information on the economics
tion, meat qualities, and marketing. of livestock production.
Page 4 ATTRA Dairy Beef

5. Some of the variables you might consider in a
budget include animal costs (purchase price,
Resources
labor, veterinary costs, supplemental feed and/
or mineral, interest, and marketing costs), and
General dairy beef
pasture costs (seed, fertility, equipment, baling Anderson, Peter T. and Hugh Chester-Jones.
costs for hay, labor, land costs, and property 1991. Suggestions for Feeding Holstein Steers
taxes). By figuring these costs on a per-animal in Minnesota. University of Minnesota.
basis, you can figure a break-even price for your www.extension.umn.edu/beef/components/
animals. Any income over the break-even price publications/bcmu23.pdf.
is considered a profit, and income under the Dairy Beef Quality Assurance
break-even price is a loss. www.dbqa.org
If you plan to direct market your beef, part of Voluntary program designed for dairy pro-
your business planning process and profitabil- ducers who also earn a part of their income
ity analysis should include carcass yield informa- from contribution to the beef supply. Pro-
tion. It is important to have a clear understand- motes awareness of the producer’s role in
ing of how many pounds of beef each animal the beef industry as well as food safety and
will yield and break it down into yield per retail beef quality.
cut. You can then calculate break-even prices
for retail or wholesale beef products. Remember University of Minnesota Dairy Beef Resources
that as a beef carcass ages it shrinks. Calculate www.extension.umn.edu/Dairy
this shrink into your break-even point (Muck- Modernization
low and LeValley, 2003).
The University of Kentucky offers online Direct
Pasture and Grazing
and Local Meat Marketing Aids that include Gerrish, Jim. 2004. Management-intensive
marketing budgets, yield guides, and pricing Grazing: The Grassroots of Grass Farming.
guides, as well as links to publications and other 314 p.
direct marketing resources. The Direct and To order:
Local Meat Marketing Aid tools can be down- The Stockman Grass Farmer
loaded at: www.uky.edu/Ag/KyMeat/aids.html. (800) 748-9808
www.stockmangrassfarmer.net/index.html
Figuring a breakeven price for cattle
(Boyles, et.al., no date (b))
To calculate the final break-even price, use the following formula:
[(IW X IP) + (G X C)]/FW = FP
• IW is the initial weight purchased
• IP is the initial price of the animal going into the program
• G is the expected pounds of gain during the feeding program
• C is the cost per pound of gain
• FW is the final weight sold
• FP is the final price needed to break even on the investment
Example:
Assume you are purchasing 500-pound calves at $0.90 per pound. You expect an average daily gain
of 1.5 pounds per day on grass, which will yield a 725-pound animal at the end of a 150-day grazing
season. For example, assume a cost per pound of gain at $0.50 per pound. The final price you will
need to break even is:
[(500 x .90) + (225 x .50)] / 725 = $0.78 per pound, or $565.50 per animal
www.attra.ncat.org ATTRA Page 5

6. Ball, Don, Ed Ballard, Mark Kennedy, Garry Baker, Michael J. 2004. The Effect of Initial
Lacefield, and Dan Undersander. 2008. Weight and Winter Diet on the Performance,
Extending Grazing and Reducing Stored Feed Meat Quality and Profitability of Holstein Beef
Needs. Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative for the Grass-Finished Market. Northern NY
Publication. Agricultural Development Program Project
www.agry.purdue.edu/Ext/forages/pdf/Extending Report.
Grazing-Auburn.pdf. www.nnyagdev.org/reportarchives/NNYADP
04BeefReport.pdf
Undersander, Dan, Beth Albert, Dennis Cos-
grove, Dennis Johnson, and Paul Peterson.
2002. Pastures for Profit: A Guide to Rota- References
tional Grazing. Cooperative Extension Publish- Bartlett, Ben. 1998. Are they a gold mine or
ing. University of Wisconsin-Extension. the shaft?. The Stockman Grass Farmer. Sep-
Phone 877-947-7827. tember. p. 1, 9-12.
http://learningstore.uwex.edu/pdf/A3529.pdf
Boyles, Stephen, Steven Loerch, Francis Flu-
harty, William Shulaw, and Harvey Stanfield.
Marketing and Economics No date (a). Chapter 9: Feeding Programs, in
Burdine, Kenneth H., A. Lee Meyer, and Leigh Feedlot Management Primer. Department of
J. Maynard. 2004. Understanding the Market Animal Sciences, Ohio State University.
for Holstein Steers. Livestock Marketing Infor- http://beef.osu.edu/library/feedlot/index.html
mation Center.
Boyles, Stephen, Steven Loerch, Francis Flu-
www.iowabeefcenter.org/content/Holstein
harty, William Shulaw, and Harvey Stanfield.
Steers-UnderstandingTheMarket.pdf
No date (b). Chapter 1: Purchasing Cattle in
Eldridge, R.W., Kenneth H. Burdine, and Feedlot Management Primer. Department of
Richard Trimble. 2005. The Economics of Animal Sciences, Ohio State University.
Rotational Grazing. University of Kentucky http://beef.osu.edu/library/feedlot/ch1.html
Cooperative Extension Service.
Buchanan, Brent. 2009. Cornell Cooperative
www.uky.edu/Ag/AgriculturalEconomics/pubs/
Extension. Personal communication.
ext_aec/ext2005-02.pdf
Chester-Jones, H.and A. DiCostanzo. 1996.
Hamilton, Neil D. 1999. The Legal Guide for
Beef Cattle Management Update, Issue 35:
Direct Farm Marketing.
Holstein Feeding Programs. University of Min-
Available from: nesota.
Agricultural Law Center www.extension.umn.edu/Beef/components/
Drake University publications/bcmu35.pdf
2507 University Avenue
Comerford, John W., Lynn F. Kime, Karen
Des Moines, IA 50311
E. Knoll, and Jayson K. Harper. 2008. Agri-
515-271-2947
cultural Alternatives: Dairy-Beef Production.
Mainville, Denise, Gordon Groover, Ashleigh Penn State Agricultural Research and Coopera-
Waddle, and Bradley Webb. 2009. A Charac- tive Extension.
terization of Direct-Market Beef Processing and http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/FreePubs/pdfs/ua296.pdf
Marketing in Virginia. Virginia Cooperative
Eng,Kenneth S. 2005. Dairy Beef Produc-
Extension.
tion Past, Present, and Future, in Managing &
http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/448/448-123/448-123.html
Marketing Quality Holstein Steers Proceed-
ings. University of Minnesota Dairy Extension,
Beef carcass and meat quality Rochester, MN.
Jones, David R., and William C. Stringer. www.extension.umn.edu/dairy/holsteinsteers/pdfs/
1993. Beef Carcass Grading and Evaluation. papers/DairyBeefProduction_Eng.pdf
University of Missouri Extension.
Gerrish, Jim. 2007. Can legume nitrogen do it
http://extension.missouri.edu/publications/
alone?. Beef Magazine.
DisplayPub.aspx?P=G2220
http://beefmagazine.com/mag/legume_nitrogen
Page 6 ATTRA Dairy Beef

7. Grant, Rick, Rick Stock, and Terry Mader. Rulofson, F., M. Gamroth, and D. Hansen.
1993. Feeding and Managing Holstein Steers. 1993. Raising Newborn Calves. Oregon State
University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension. University.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi http://farmix.com.pk/elib/calf_rearing_guide_2.
?article=1443&context=extensionhist pdf
Holder, J. 2005. How to Direct Market Your Rust, Steven R. and Cassie S. Abney. 2005.
Beef. SAN Publications. Comparison of Dairy versus Beef Steers.
www.sare.org/publications/beef.htm Department of Animal Sciences, University of
Wisconsin. Managing & Marketing Quality
Johnson, K.L. 1993. Will Milk’s Champ Beat
Holstein Steers Proceedings, Rochester, MN.
Beef in the Feedlot?. USAgriculture. January
www.extension.umn.edu/dairy/holsteinsteers/pdfs/
19. p. 1, 8-9.
papers/ComparisonDairyVsBeef_Rust.pdf
Lehmkuhler, Jeff. 2005. Grazing Holstein
Schaefer, Daniel M. 2005. Yield and Quality
Steers: An Alternative to the Calf-fed Model.
of Holstein Beef, in Managing & Marketing
Department of Animal Sciences, University of
Quality Holstein Steers Proceedings. University
Wisconsin. Managing & Marketing Quality
of Minnesota Dairy Extension, Rochester, MN
Holstein Steers Proceedings, Rochester, MN.
www.extension.umn.edu/dairy/holsteinsteers/pdfs/
www.extension.umn.edu/Dairy/holsteinsteers/pdfs/
papers/YieldAndQuality_Schaefer.pdf
papers/GrazingHolsteinSteers_Lehmkuhler.pdf
Schuster, Undersander, Schaefer, Klemme, Sie-
Lowe, Marcy and Gary Gereffi. 2009. A Value
mens, and Smith. 2001. Stocker Enterprise
Chain Analysis of the U.S. Beef and Dairy
Budgets for Grass-Based Systems. University of
Industries. Center on Globalization, Gover-
Wisconsin.
nance & Competitiveness, Duke University.
http://learningstore.uwex.edu/pdf/A3718.pdf
www.cggc.duke.edu/environment/valuechain
analysis/CGGC_BeefDairyReport_2-16-09.pdf Thilmany, Dawn and Martha Sullins. 2004.
Niche Beef Resources. Workshop material pre-
Miller, K.P. et al. 1986. Studies on Dairy Beef
sented by Colorado State University, Depart-
Production. Bulletin AD-SB-2896. University
ment of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
of Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.
Department of Animal Sciences. CSU-Exten-
p. 4.
sion, and American Farmland Trust.
Mucklow, C.J., and Robbie Baird LeValley. http://dare.colostate.edu/tools/nichebeef.aspx
2003. Direct Marketing Beef: Pros and Cons,
Do’s and Don’ts. Range Beef Cow Symposium,
Animal Science Department, University of
Nebraska-Lincoln. Accessed June 2009.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi
?article=1052&context=rangebeefcowsymp
Murphey, Edward J., David G. St Louis, Bruce
L. Clark, Billy B. Johnson, Robert A. Adams,
Frank T. Withers, and William A. Brock.
1997. Beef Production from Holstein Steers on
No-Till Ryegrass Pastures. Mississippi State
University.
http://msucares.com/pubs/bulletins/b1071.htm
Nation, A. 1991. Big profits from little Hol-
steins. The Stockman Grass Farmer. June. p. 1,
4-6.
Nation, Allan. 1993. Dairy goats suckle dairy
calves in Mississippi. The Stockman Grass
Farmer. December. p. 1, 8.
www.attra.ncat.org ATTRA Page 7

8. Dairy Beef
By Anne Fanatico, NCAT Agriculture Specialist
Published 2000
Updated by Lee Rinehart, NCAT Agriculture Specialist
© 2010 NCAT
Holly Michels, Editor
Robyn Metzger, Production
This publication is available on the Web at:
www.attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/dairybeef.html
or
www.attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/dairybeef.pdf
IP368
Slot 20
Version 090210
Page 8 ATTRA