The difficulty in addressing any animal welfare issue is that we, as a species, have not made any agreement or definition as to what animal welfare really means. People, for the most part, have decided what one should or shouldn’t do to another person – at least in a relatively broad sense. Whether this is due to religion, legislation or other causes is far too messy to be deciphered. Conversely, these same rules, when applied to animals, are often ambiguous and vary between cultures, regions and even individuals. Like human rights issues, people’s thoughts on animals are also a product of religion, legislation and time. Philosophically, animal rights and welfare present one of the greatest paradoxes people are faced with in a ‘civilized’ society. In 2014, The National Council for Animal Protection reported that eighty-five percent of American adults support animal protection causes, with ninety percent of those respondents stating that, “Animals should be protected from all suffering and harm caused by humans.” This is an increase of nineteen percent from 2005, so it could reasonably be extrapolated that those numbers have increased further between 2014 and 2022 (“New Poll”).

Given this data, it should be reasonable for Americans to expect that animals raised for their own consumption are treated compassionately and protected from harm. Hundreds of laws have been enacted at the federal, state and local levels to ensure the minimum humane treatment available to these animals – at least the best that can be expected from an economically and politically viable standpoint (“Legal Protections”). In fact, it’s not uncommon to find production animals who receive better treatment than many people’s dogs, cats, and even children.  Large-scale dairy, beef, pork and poultry manufacturers are subject to inspections, are expected to keep diligent and honest records, and voluntarily spend millions of dollars annually in the care of their animals (Eborn). If it is to be expected that producers with thousands of animals be able provide competent care and protect those creatures as autonomous beings with whose welfare they have been tasked, the same should be expected of small, independent operations.

Advancements in animal medicine, psychology and technology are nothing new. For centuries, people have been innovating more efficient, less stressful ways to tend to animals of all types, from companion animals to wildlife. However, because of the number of animals and the economic impact of the industry, livestock production may have seen the most innovation throughout the twentieth century (Dimitri). Unfortunately, even with free and easy access to information and the availability of inexpensive and easy-to-use tools, many small producers are using livestock management techniques that predate the industrial revolution. This is especially prevalent in independently owned and operated beef ranches throughout the United States – those with only a couple-dozen or up-to one-hundred head of cattle. Whether this is through willful ignorance, lack of accountability or a blatant disregard for animal welfare, it is an issue that should be addressed.

Small-scale beef ranchers may have found their way into the industry through inheritance, homesteading, hobby, or may have existed in this capacity for their entire lives. For the sake of simplifying discussion, the term ‘Heirloom’ rancher will be applied to all of these individuals, unless needed to distinguish between individual methods or mentalities that may lead to concerns for the cattle under their care.

The vast differences in the lives of these bovine, when compared to counterparts at large-scale, or commercial, facilities, starts off even before they are born. A tremendous amount of care and attention go into breeding and prenatal care at professional facilities. Exposure to bulls, if used at all, are monitored and recorded, paying attention to the estrus cycles of the cow, the safety of the herd around the bull, and the genetics of the animals – not only to prevent inbreeding, but to cull possible genetic diseases (Statham). Conversely, on an Heirloom ranch, a bull may be borrowed from a neighbor, hop a fence or be left on pasture for years. This can lead to a multitude of problems, from the passing on of unknown genetic or pathogenic diseases to the misclassification of the breed of animals. Sadly, but not uncommon, bulls often will be left on pasture to breed with their own heifer calves, which can not only lead to health problems with the subsequent progeny, but often decreases the quality and quantity of the beef (Burrow).

As the calf develops in utero, additional care should be given to the mother cow, both for her benefit and for that of her unborn calf. While credible livestock nutrition information is readily accessible, even the uninformed should know enough about the human reproduction process. At least, in that the mother often needs additional food or resources. Consider the ubiquity of the term, ‘eating for two’. Leading again with the example of commercial operation, cows have their diet adjusted and are given supplements to encourage the growth of the fetus, the production of milk, and the maintenance of the cow’s health. Cows on Heirloom ranches are often left out to pasture, even until the calf is born, subsisting on the same diet of undergrown grass that they live on throughout the year. In a better-case scenario, breeding could be timed so pre-parturition grazing happens on the best spring grass, but without breeding control, calves may be born when there is nothing but dry, brown grass left. Not only do neither of these scenarios provide the cows with the additional nutrition needed to produce healthy calves, it opens both mother and calf up to other possible problems, such as disease, poisoning and malnutrition (Trenkle; Forero).

Pasture rotation is an important part of any ranching operation, but especially critical on those with limited acreage. Or, more likely, those who have been overpopulated due to lack of breeding control and culling. Rotation of pastures involves fencing of a property into several smaller pastures and moving the herd from one area to another every several days. This provides the time needed for the grass and its roots system to regenerate. Grass that is constantly grazed and trampled provides lower-quality nutrition, grows slower and, eventually, leads to damage to the surrounding ecosystem through erosion, runoff and dust-storms (Suszkiw; Al-Kaisi). Because many Heirloom ranches are not supervised on a regular basis, pasture rotation often doesn’t happen, as that would require man-hours to move the herd. Though, it should be noted that a full cattle-drive is not needed to move cattle to the next pasture – especially when the grass is greener on the other side. Pasture rotation also requires at least a cursory knowledge of horticulture, which many ranchers seem unwilling or unable to learn, despite the information being easily accessible. Other excuses for failing to maximize the quality of pasture grass may involve the extra labor and expense of installing fencing and gates. In this case, these ranchers should consider decreasing their herd size to an equilibrium level.

Understanding the basics of horticulture, or hiring a specialist, should be paramount to an individual wishing to get into the hobbyist-ranching business. Extending well-beyond pasture rotation, this includes basic knowledge of the nutrients and minerals in the native grasses, as this makes up the entirety of the animal’s diet throughout their lives. For example, in 2016 and 2017, after heavy rains, several adjoining ranches in Fresno County, California, saw an outbreak of congenital chondrodystrophy, with some ranches seeing more than eighty-percent of their calves born with this deformation. After two years of mystification at this anomaly, and blaming the genetics of a recently-acquired bull who had been passed from ranch-to-ranch, soil testing revealed a dire lack of manganese in the grasses. The addition of mineral blocks, which were not previously provided, ended this perceived epidemic almost immediately. This is just one example of how ignorance on this subject can be harmful to the welfare of the animals on these types of ranches (Buskirk; Pannett).

Not only is it important for ranchers, as the caretakers of these animals, to understand what they should be eating, but what they shouldn’t be eating. Plants native to the United States, and several in California, are toxic to cattle. These include the prolific oleander, oak and milkweed species. Without proper maintenance of the landscape, these plants can grow in abundance; and without enough quality grass or other dietary supplements provided, the cows may be inclined to eat these plants. This can cause a multitude of health problems for mother and calf, from depression to weight-loss and even “sudden death” (Forero).

Still, the short and tragic life of this hypothetical calf has yet to begin. It’s no secret that the act of giving birth is difficult for both mother and child. Beyond that, just like human babies, calves need to be cleaned and fed after being born. While animals generally have an innate instinct as mothers that far exceed that of people, they are by no means infallible and are still subject to the anomalies of nature. While left to their own devices in nature, all species should be expected to experience at least some occurrences of dystocia. However, when confining animals and assuming responsibility for their welfare, the rancher should be expected to provide some level of support to the animals. That is, if there is anyone at the Heirloom ranch when calving begins. Those with uncontrolled breeding are likely to have calves born at random intervals over a period of several months, meaning even ranches with some kind of full or part-time staff will be unable to predict when a cow will give birth except through visual signs, which may be misinterpreted by those who are uninformed or working with flawed information.

While a commercial producer may have veterinarians on site, or at the very least, trained staff and a veterinarian on call, an independent rancher may wait until there is a problem before attempting to do anything and, even then, may get their information from a Google search, not knowing exactly what to search for – or from a neighbor. In our example this is the first instance of two of the core issues of this type of ranching operation: an uninformed rancher attempting to act as their own veterinarian, and the passing on of outdated or incorrect information between Heirloom ranchers. Today, even a child could easily debunk ideas like, “Chewing gum stays in your stomach for seven years,” or, “If you cross your eyes, they’ll stay like that,” as ‘wives tales’. Yet these same types of myths persist, having been passed on for generations of ranchers, as if they were bequeathed in the will along with the ranchland. This misinformation can be detrimental to the physical health and mental well-being of the entire herd (Buddle).

Common difficulties during birth in bovine include transverse presentation, en-caul birth or adherent placenta (Selk, Stempfle). Advice on how to deal with these problems may be given by a veterinarian over the phone – or even online – yet the Heirloom rancher may follow the protocols set forward by previous generations, which lack basic insight to proper hygiene, use of tools and gentle, compassionate care. Against advice readily provided to the public by veterinarians and livestock specialists, some Heirloom ranchers continue to perpetuate such acts as using brute force to remove a calf or placenta from the cow, despite the long-term damage that can be caused by these acts, which can prove fatal. (Vander Plaats; Drost)

Presuming that our newborn calf, Mo[o]rgan Friesian, is born without any complications, he and mother-cow have a few critical postnatal hours where even minor issues can prove fatal. Unlike human babies, who are unable to care for themselves in any way for months, bovid are precocial and should be able to stand and nurse on their own with little help from mom within the first few hours after birth. If newborn Morgan struggles to get up on his own or find a teat, an attentive cow might nudge him in the right direction. Even if the mother lacks some of this instinct herself, another cow in the herd might step in to help. But if they don’t, it should be the responsibility of the rancher to step in when needed – not only for the sake of their cash cow(s) – the herd – but as an ethical and compassionate human being. The problem the Heirloom rancher faces is not only in identifying any postpartum symptoms and knowing how to treat them properly, but being present in the first place (“A Cow Gives Birth”).

Without controlled breeding, as noted, the calving of a herd can be spread out over a period of weeks and months, making it not only unpredictable to schedule calving into the life of the hobbyist rancher, but exhausting. Besides medical issues, a herd needs to be checked often during calving season for injuries, calves born in inaccessible areas – such as a creek or rocky crag, calves lost or abandoned by mom, calves who have wandered under fences, and exposure to predators. A mother cow may search for days for a lost calf, or stand helplessly by while her newborn dies from exposure to elements or starvation. All variations of cow-calf separations have been shown to cause emotional stress and could lead to enduring trauma to both cow and calf (Wagner).  Likewise, if the cow were to be lost, injured or deceased, the calf may not know how to find the herd. If he does, another cow may not take him in, or may not be able to. These situations can be solved easily by a human with superior resources and reasoning, but that human needs to not only be present, but aware.

To say these were worst-case scenarios would minimize not only the frequency with which these events occur, but their detriment to the animals involved. However, if young Morgan manages to breathe, stand and eat on his own, stay in close-contact with mother, and not suffer any other physical trauma, there is still the concern of his nutrition and health to be addressed. Cows grazing on unhealthy grasses or toxic plants will pass those toxins on to their calves – or fail to pass on critical nutrition, as the case may be (Forero). Not only that, but young calves may be exposed to bacteria, find themselves in mud or other substrates that can be bad for their health, or get regular infections, such as conjunctivitis from being just tall enough to be defecated on by adult cows. This, of course, can be a concern at a commercial feedlot as well, but regular care and cleaning can minimize the risk. Additionally, early processing of young calves can minimize many of these risks (Foote).

The negative impact of uncontrolled, unsupervised breeding extends beyond pregnancy and the first few hours or days of life. One should logically construe that rounding-up a herd from a ranch of several-hundred acres every week would be an inefficient use of resources and stressful for the animals when compared to doing so once or twice per year; even the most unseasoned of ranchers knows this. However, when calves are born over a period of several weeks or months, but are all processed at the same time, there can be a slew of negative effects for the calves and, by proxy, the herd.

Techniques for rounding up a herd of cattle vary as widely as there are ranchers. Arguments over the efficacy of one roundup technique compared to another are common throughout the entirety of the roundup and processing ordeal. Before even venturing forth on the ranch to collect the herd, there needs to be somewhere to put the cattle. Despite decades of research by experts like Temple Grandin and her contemporaries, and the virtually open-source availability of the results of their research, Heirloom ranchers may cobble together panels and fencing to create an environment that not only make it more difficult to control the movement of the animals, but increase the anxiety and risk of injury to both bovine and handler.

While the old-fashioned square pens have been shown by Dr. Grandin to be a stressful and inefficient method of handling, the blame for the use of poorly designed pens cannot be placed squarely on the ignorance of the rancher. Dr. Grandin writes, “There are usually three basic causes of problems in crowd pens and chutes: Distractions…Poor handling methods…[and] Layout mistakes,” in her Guide to Working with Farm Animals: Safe, Humane Livestock Handling Practices for the Small Farm and on her website, where she provides several free tips for livestock handling and designs for pens available for download (Grandin 112). These practices, or a variation thereof, are considered industry-standard amongst commercial producers. However, books published by other ‘experts’ and targeted toward hobbyist ranchers, such as Philip Hasheider in his book, How to Raise Cattle: Everything You Need to Know, gives such suggestions as, “Use angles in corral building,” and “Use old railroad ties and metal guard-rails to build corrals.” Accompanying photographs show pens built using hard angles, contrary to the advice of Dr. Grandin, and using salvaged materials (Hasheider 30).  With time and money being a concern in any operation, these experts no doubt give confidence to the Heirloom rancher when they throw together a crude box using repurposed barn materials.

Getting the herd into the pen is no easy task for the uninitiated. With regular conditioning and adaptation to the behavior of the herd, one can get them to congregate in the pen themselves. However, a herd spread across wide acreage who rarely have human contact will instinctively avoid being trapped by these foreign predator animals (people). Horses have been the standard for working livestock for hundreds of years. Many ranches still use horses for this task. Many horsemanship skills have been lost to time, leaving inept ‘cowboys’ who aggressively kick and pull the reins of their mounts between periods of leaving them tied up while fully tacked for hours. The treatment of ranch horses will not be discussed in detail, but one can presume that attitudes toward the treatment and value of animals carry over from one species to another (Cook; McGreevy 196).

Those who choose not to use horses for roundup purposes will typically use vehicles – trucks, ATVs and motorbikes. While easier to manage for the driver/rider, these vehicles, especially when not regularly used around the ranch, can be frightening and stressful for the cattle. A common technique is to blare the horn of the vehicle to scare the herd into moving or, if in a larger vehicle, to ‘bump’ them from behind. These can both be dangerous to animal and rancher, should the driver misjudge their control or if the animal acts in an unpredictable way. Additionally, spasmodic driving techniques can cause damage to the terrain of the ranch, destroying game trails and causing erosion and runoff, which can decrease the quality of naturally-occurring food and water sources (Thomas; Taylor).

Now that young Morgan, his mother, half-brothers and sisters, and the rest of the group are in this corral – square or round – they need to be sorted. That is, separating the animals that will be processed from those who won’t. It would be convenient for everyone involved if all of the calves would go to one side of the pen and everyone else went to the other but, alas, most animals don’t operate that way and calves, especially, stay close to their mothers for both food and protection. A herd acclimated to human presence, and those humans being aware of bovine behavior, can be sorted in the pen with relative ease (Grandin 46). If this were the case among Heirloom ranchers, there would be no cause for concern. In fact, horses have an intrinsic ability to do this task, but are often impeded by unclear signals from riders. What can often end up happening in the situation of the rancher who knows not what to do is a combination of whipping at or scaring the herd from behind while another individual attempts to block or permit entrance through the gate. This is confusing and stressful to the animals, not only creating a negative human experience, but pre-traumatizing the young calves who are about to go through further stress at the hands of these ranchers.

There are a lot of things that can go wrong during the sort, including injury to animal and human. Presuming the Heirloom rancher has made it this far without any major injuries and, hopefully, minor stress to the animals, they must now ‘process’ the calves. This is colloquially referred to as ‘marking and branding’. The procedure includes trapping the animal, using a hot-iron brand to scar its hide, attaching an ear tag, vaccinations and, if necessary, removal of horns and castration of bull calves. Sadly, while this is likely to be the most stressful event in the animal’s life, it is also the period where a plethora of misinformation, archaic techniques and poor ability give rise to several health and welfare concerns.

Young calves typically will not get into a chute willingly, especially when surrounded by loud, aggressive people. Poorly constructed corrals exacerbate a calf’s apprehension, moreso when bearing witness to what is happening in front of them or leaving room for egress. A frustrated or unsympathetic rancher may whip calves or prod at them with an electric tasing device (Grandin; Thomas). When not available these ranchers may resort to hitting or kicking calves or pulling their tails to force movement. Several books aimed at beginner ranchers suggest a tail-pulling technique. Some, like Veterinary Guide for Animal Owners, by C.E. Spalding, DMV [sic], give little to no detail on its proper application, advising to grab the animal’s tail and pull it over its back, emphasizing to, “really push” (Spalding 29). In fact, all of these techniques, while effective in some circumstances, may be passed on from generation to generation, perpetuating their incorrect use. Again, the problem of uncontrolled breeding continues to have an impact, as larger calves are expectedly more difficult to handle than smaller calves.

Handling larger calves is not only problematic when it comes to getting them into a chute, but increases the level of trauma and risk of infection (Thomas 144). While being squeezed to immobility in the chute, even being squeezed to the point of discomfort by overzealous chute operators, ranch-workers will often use rope on one or both of the calf’s hind legs to further restrain the animal and prevent kicking during the branding and castration process. Lack of knowledge of anatomy and rope-tying, along with inexperienced and trepidatious handlers, can lead to further injury to the calves. Spalding recommends straddling a calf’s neck, “as if riding it” and to raise the head by lifting under the chin. The author also suggests restraining an animal for processing by, “grasp[ing] the tail and…press one knee into the belly.” This is Spalding’s suggested method for testicle banding for bull-calves up to six-hundred pounds, but the same technique can be used for a “larger bull,” but, “a couple more assistants are always helpful” (63)

It should be acknowledged that it is common practice for the ‘staff’ of these marking-and-branding events are friends, family and neighbors of the Heirloom rancher. Aside from other local Heirloom ranchers, who are the stereotypical perpetrators of disseminating outdated information, these folks, in general, lack knowledge or experience of best-handling practices and do this sort of work once-or-twice per year, quite possibly in exchange for beer. Logic follows that if operating a 1,500 lb vehicle while intoxicated is dangerous, attempting to manage several dozen autonomous creatures of similar size would be perilous (Dogan).

Nevertheless, for the Heirloom rancher, processing must be done eventually. Having the calf squeezed to a table and legs restrained, a team of inexperienced ranch-hands may set to their assigned tasks. Ear tagging is, subjectively, the easiest task to complete and might even be assigned to children. While learning where to place the tag to avoid damage to the circulatory system is relatively simple; unclear instructions, an unsteady hand, or a thrashing calf can cause the handler to misplace the tag, causing harm to the young animal. Additionally, cleaning of the calf’s ear and the ear-tag pliers may be conducted improperly, if at all, increasing the potential for the spread of infection (Hayer).

Likewise, the reuse of a single needle for vaccination increases the chances for spread of infection. As with ear-tagging, use of antiseptic agents may be used little, or not at all. As has been seen throughout the life and pre-life of these calves, their wide gap in age and size compounds problems that are already present in herds with well-managed breeding routines. Not only does the act of the injection itself give some cause for concern, but the timing with which the medications are given can have an impact on the well-being of the herd. An older calf has more time to possibly contract a disease before being inoculated and, if transmittable, passing it on to other herd members. When vaccinated younger, calves have the opportunity to build antibodies from an earlier date, giving support to their already-fragile immune systems (Foote). Furthermore, some vaccinations may require different dosages for various ages and weights (Merck). An inexperienced individual may give the same dosage to each animal because that is what they know or because that is the setting on their injector ‘gun’.

Livestock-branding, in-and-of itself, is a topic of much debate. Whether or not necessary and, if so, if other means of identification are better for the animal, are certainly arguments with their merits and faults (Moggy). Determining which procedure is best may be too difficult to decipher for the Heirloom rancher, and for good cause. However, whichever method they chose, the cause for concern amongst inexperienced ranchers is with their apprehension in applying the technique and lack of knowledge in proper after-care. Hot-iron brands, which are still commonplace, can cause [additional] trauma to the animal when under or over applied. An uncertain hand can cause the brand to be blurry, leading to multiple painful applications. Meanwhile, the calf must remain restrained while waiting for the iron to get back to the appropriate temperature. An under-heated brand, if applied, will cause the animal pain, while not burning the hide deep enough to create the brand. Conversely, a heavy-handed branding can burn deeper than necessary to create a permanent mark. This can lead to long-lasting pain, muscle damage and risk for future infection (Brody). Without access to veterinary staff – or even well-trained handlers – these animals may receive little or no attention after these procedures, both for routine infection and more serious issues.

Among causes for concern in post-processing care, castration can present a myriad of issues – most of which could be circumvented through proper care and technique. As with branding livestock, removing a young male’s testicles can be done through various methods, none without their own virtue and inferiority. In the Heirloom-ranching trade, the most common procedure, when compared to banding and chemical castration, is the surgical method (Moggy). This involves opening the calf’s scrotum, severing the connection between testicles and body, then discarding the testes. Although emasculators are readily available to make this procedure, in part, safer and easier for both calf and handler, this is usually done with a blade. Commonly, a scalpel, razor blade or pocketknife (Lane). Official surveys have not been conducted, but one could presume that in the average American household, it would not be acceptable to hold someone down and let a half-drunk uncle go to town on their genitals with his Leatherman knife. Somehow, though, this seems to be an acceptable way to treat an animal amongst the Heirloom rancher community. As with all steps of processing, improper sanitation is a concern, as well as re-use of tools. In addition to the potential for spreading disease, a dulled blade can lead to imprecise cuts, increased pain and greater likelihood of self-injury to the handler (Malone).

It is worth noting that ‘cowboy’ and ‘rodeo’ versions of these processing procedures exist and are still in use, albeit at a much lower rate than in years past. With the exception of facilitating access to individual calves shortly after birth, it can be presumed that mobile operations would have less access to tools, restraints and sanitation than stationary operations. However, any amount of sanitation carried on horseback is better than none in a barn.

Following the completion of these procedures on all of the first-year calves, the herd will typically be released back into a pasture that may be muddy or contain other contaminants that can spread to newly-created wounds. The Heirloom rancher may not have clean and available indoor facilities, nor the time or manpower to supervise the herd for extended periods of time. Still, the calves, and herd as a whole, should be checked regularly for any signs of infection or distress. Without regular ranch staff, nor the knowledge on what to look for, potentially minor issues can become life-threatening issues.

This lack of supervision and expertise will sustain its impact on the herd for the remainder of the year, as the calves grow into steers and heifers. In addition to the lack of professional medical and preventative-health care, cattle may be subjected to limitless YouTube, do-it-yourself, holistic and ‘wives’ tale’ cures for any malady from pinkeye to control of flies and other pests. For example, Mark Gilberd, a self-proclaimed Iridologist and Medical Herbalist writes in his book, “Treat cerebral oedema with belladonna, encephalitis with garlic, echinacea and myrrh. Hepatitis, milk thistle, ‘is best given alone at the beginning of the crisis until the worst is over’.” He also suggests that puncture wounds, such as from, “rusty nails, barbed wire or from tools can be dealt with very effectively,” proclaiming “hypericum and ledum will prevent tetanus” (Gilberd).

The same lack of botanical and nutritional knowledge that could have had a negative impact on baby while in the womb and nursing exist as it grazes on its own. Toxic plants, if not remediated, can be consumed and create health problems that, in turn, could have an impact on the quality of the meat produced for human consumption. Sadly, misinformation like Ann Larkin Hansen’s Hobby Farm: Beef Cattle suggests that cattle can be grazed on “low, wet land, not suitable for other animals.” She also states, “Poisonous plants lurk in most pastures, but fortunately cattle usually know better than to eat any” (Hansen 72).

As the calves grow, they’ll be consuming more grass, which means the total number of animals grazing the same acreage has increased. Improper or nonexistent pasture rotation and management techniques are thereby compounded, leading to even more damage to the biological ecosystem and nutritional value of the ranchland. As seasons change and weather dries, the longevity and quality of the grass decreases, further compounding the correlation between poor land management and animal nutrition concerns (Thomas).

Regarding weather, although animals are fortunate to have a protective coat, they are still subject to the elements. Inadequate access to shelter in extreme heat or cold, or rain and snow, can lead to continued stress and eventual physical health concerns (Webster 205). While some may view a commercial feedlot as crowded, it’s important to remember the protection from the elements they are provided, sometimes including climate control. Additionally, unsupervised ranch animals may have a hard time accessing food or water in extreme conditions due to snowpack, freezing or evaporation.

Peripheral care should be provided to herd members throughout their lives, however long or short that may be. With an animal that may live only a year, it may seem impractical to spend time and money on something like hoof care. However, an attitude of general neglect ‘until it becomes a problem’ can carry over to an entire operation. Heifers who are due to be retained and existing cows and bulls should receive regular care to avoid conditions like foot-rot and hoof overgrowth. Though, this work, and other maintenance, should be carried out by someone trained in the practice and proper safety procedures. Possibly worse than neglecting something seemingly innocuous like hoof-trimming are DIY farriers, who attempt to learn from a few online lessons. Improper foot care can lead to conditions like hemorrhage and toe necrosis, not to mention the potential for injury to animal and handler during the process.

 As the animal becomes closer to an ideal weight or age, and as the resources around the ranch become further depleted, the cattle need to be prepared for market. In this case, because beef cattle are sold by weight, preparation mostly includes gorging animals in order to increase their overall weight. With the potential of being underfed and malnourished until this point, a sudden diet change to a bevy of alfalfa, grains and supplements can cause a number of problems. One of the most common occurrences with this sudden overfeeding is ruminal tympany or ‘bloat’, as it is commonly referred. This is caused by an increase in gasses built up in the rumen and can lead to death if not treated with haste. A solution that is considered less painful with lower likelihood of infections and secondary problems is intubation of the stomach to release the gasses. Unfortunately, many resources suggest using a trocar or other sharp object to “stab through the hide” as is seen in both Veterinary Guide for Animal Owners by C.E. Spalding and Raising Beef Cattle by Heather Smith Thomas. The difficulty is not in that this procedure should not ever be performed, but that it is presented as the cure for a preventable, man-made problem – and done so without specific instructions, precautions or consequences (Spalding 77; Thomas 127).

Despite this, and other obvious humane concerns when it comes to these feeding practices, there is an impact on the beef industry as well. When animals are subjected to these conditions, the quality of their meat can not be expected to be as high as those from a well-maintained ranch or facility. Additionally, marketing animals as ‘grass-fed’ implies that they graze on grass or eat grass-hay. Gorging on additional feeds is not only dishonest, but lowers the consumer expectations of the quality and conditions of beef sold as grass-fed. In How to Raise Cattle, Philip Hasheider recommends direct-selling to consumers through “value-added selling” which he describes as using buzzwords like “natural, organic, green, and grass-fed” (Hasheider 144).

Although the beef may be graded lower than that with better breeding and care routines, the impact on the consumer perception of the industry can be affected by the unmonitored breeding and diets of Heirloom ranchers. For example, a rancher with a Wagyu bull and a variety of heifers and cows, for example Angus and Limousin, may market their product as ‘Wagyu’. This may be a half-truth if the neighbor’s Angus bull didn’t jump the fence and breed the females. A consumer who purchases this lower-quality beef with Wagyu, creating negative association in the market.

While much of this Heirloom-ranch beef won’t see the shelf at the local big-box retailer, it can be found in restaurants and health-food stores. Often promoted as ‘locally sourced’ and sold at a significant markup, this beef can skirt the laws – and the eyes of diligent inspectors. While some may consider this a freedom of free-trade, their actions can not only create a negative impact on the industry and the breed perception, but a genuine concern for the health of the consumer. Without adequate pre-and-post-slaughter checks, in addition to the aforementioned lifespan care, the beef that is provided to individuals may not only be lower quality, but potentially harmful. Diseases, medications and parasites can be passed on to a person through consumption of contaminated meat (Almashhadany 163). This risk exists throughout the meat industry, but proper care for the animal and static health requirements for slaughter help to mitigate these risks.

It makes little sense to police every Heirloom and hobbyist rancher. However, with some modifications to the requirements for these individuals to offer animals for sale, and claiming any tax benefits thereby, some of these practices and practitioners can be filtered from the system. This includes special regulation, record-keeping and inspection routines, in addition to greater requirements – and access to – training and education.

Ignorance, intentional or unintentional, has no place in the care of living things. A minimum standard of training for Heirloom ranchers, or designated personnel, should be required for certification of the minimal operational standards. These training sessions should set breeding, health, and processing standards, with additional attention paid to land, resource and ecosystem management. Processing events, as well as birth records, would need to be endorsed by these certified individuals, who could still offer their services to friends and neighbors. Corruption of this designation would risk penalties from revocation of licensing to surrender of animals.

With the ready-availability of technology, and its exponential growth, there should be no reasons that this certifying-body could not conduct remote oversight of animals. Some simple solutions could include pre-registering processing ‘events’, requiring that processing or calving information be submitted digitally within a limited window, for example forty-eight hours. This could prevent ‘doctoring’ of records at a future date. Random inspections could be carried out physically, in the case of processing supervision or soil-sampling, or digitally by requiring real-time photos of animals be submitted through an app, such as those that are commercially available for ranchers to monitor their own livestock (Neethirajan). Requiring submissions of unknown animals, and unknown parts of their bodies, can not only create accountability, but narrow-down the need for in-person inspections, simultaneously monitoring the accountability and follow-through of certified handlers.

As long as land and resources are available, people will find a way to exploit them for profit. As long as old-timers pass on misinformation as ‘expertise’, the uninitiated will listen. And as long as nobody is looking, (some) people will continue to use animals for personal gain, despite the well-being of those animals being at stake. These are as natural to human-nature as language or reproduction. Maybe it’s not possible to change human nature. However, by taking little steps in the right direction, such as educating and supervising Heirloom ranchers, we may be able to change the parts of human nature that are creating the most unnecessary and egregious levels of harm to these innocent, short-lived creatures.

Works Cited

“A Cow Gives Birth!”, The Incredible Dr. Pol. National Geographic. www.youtube.com/watch?v=1P3BEsucQ8M&ab_channel=NationalGeographicUK

Al-Kaisi, Mahdi, et al. “Managing Pasture to Reduce Soil Erosion”, Iowa State University, Integrated Crop Management, IC-486(20), July 30 2001, pp. 157. crops.extension.iastate.edu/encyclopedia/managing-pasture-reduce-soil-erosion. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Almashhadany, Dhary Alewy. “Meat Borne Diseases”, Meat and Nutrition, Intechopen, 28 July 2021. Edited by Chhabi Lal Ranabhat. pp. 163-168.

Brody, Shane. “Cattle Branding: How to Get it Right Every Time”, Farmer’s Weekly, 13 November 2018. www.farmersweekly.co.za/farming-basics/cattle-branding-get-right-every-time. Accessed 3 December 2022.

Burrow, Heather M. “The effects of inbreeding on productive and adaptive traits and temperament of tropical beef cattle”, Livestock Production Science, volume 55, issue 3, September 1998. pp. 227-243.

Buskirk, Dan. “Prevent Calf Abnormalities by Managing Beef Cow Diets”, Michigan State University, 2 December 2015. www.canr.msu.edu/news/prevent_calf_abnormalities_by_managing_beef_cow_diets. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Cook, W.R, and Strasser, Hiltrud. Metal in the Mouth: The Abusive Effects of Bitted Bridles. Sabine Kells, 1 January 2003. Edited by Sabine Kells.

Dimitri, Carolyn, Efland, Anne, and Neilson Conklin. “The 20th Century Transformation of U.S. Agriculture and Farm Policy”, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service: Economic Information Bulletin 2005, Number Three. www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/44197/13566_eib3_1_.pdf. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Dogan, Kamil, and Demirci, Serafettin. “Livestock-Handling Related Injuries and Deaths”. Livestock Production, edited by Khalid Javed, IntechOpen, 2012. 10.5772/50834. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/40418. Accessed 6 December 2022.

Drost, Maarten, DVM. “Management of Calving on Large Dairy Farms”, University of Florida, 11 January 2014. www.researchgate.net/profile/Maarten-Drost/publication/237221653_Management_of_Calving_on_Large_Dairy_Farms/links/00b7d52d1aca285351000000/Management-of-Calving-on-Large-Dairy-Farms.pdf. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Eborn, Ben, Small, Miranda, and Les Nunn. “Idaho Cattle Feedlot, Calf to Slaughter”, University of Idaho, 2018.  www.uidaho.edu/-/media/UIdaho-Responsive/Files/cals/programs/idaho-agbiz/livestock-budgets/fl1-18-pdf.pdf. Accessed 3 December 2022.

Forero, Larry, et al. “Livestock-Poisoning Plants of California”, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, publication 8398, January 2011. University of California, Davis, anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8398.pdf. Accessed 27 November 2022.

“Get Vaccinating Right”, Intervet, Merck, 2020. www.merck-animal-health-usa.com/offload-downloads/get-vaccinating-right-flipbook. Accessed 3 December 2022.

Gilberd, Mark. Natural Remedies for Cattle Diseases. Self-published, 2013. Pages unnumbered.

Grandin, Temple. Guide to Working with Farm Animals: Safe, Humane Livestock Handling Practices for the Small Farm. Storey Publishing, LLC, 2 May 2017. pp. 112-127.

Humane Livestock Handling: Understanding Livestock Behavior and Building Facilities for Healthier Animals. Storey Publishing, LLC, 1 June 2008. pp. 46-50

“Directions for laying out curved cattle handling facilities for ranches, feedlots, and properties”, Grandin.com. www.grandin.com/design/curved.handling.facilities.html. Accessed 3 December 2022.

Hansen, Ann Larkin. Hobby Farm: Beef Cattle: Keeping a Small-Scale Herd for Pleasure and Profit. Companionhouse Books, November 2006. pp. 72-25.

Hasheider, Philip. How to Raise Cattle: Everything You Need to Know. Voyageur Press, 15 March 2007. pp. 30-35, 144-145

Hayer, J.J., et al. “Wound Lesions Caused by Ear Tagging in Unweaned Calves: Assessing the Prevalence of Wound Lesions and Identifying Risk Factors”, Animal, volume 16, issue 2, February 2022. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731122000015#b0200. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Lane, Clyde Jr. “Castration of Beef Calves”, University of Tennessee. extension.tennessee.edu/publications/documents/sp692.pdf. Accessed 3 December 2022.

“Legal Protections for Animals on Farms”, Animal Welfare Institute, October 2018. awionline.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/FA-AWI-LegalProtections-AnimalsonFarms-110714.pdf. Accessed 27 November 2022.

Malone, Erin, DVM, Ph.D., et al. “Castration Complications”, University of Minnesota, 2019. open.lib.umn.edu/largeanimalsurgery/chapter/castration-complications. Accessed 3 December 2022.

McGreevy, Paul, and Andrew McLean. “Behavioural problems with the Ridden Horse”, Domestic Horse: The origins, development and management of its behaviour. Cambridge University Press, 2005. pp. 196.

Moggy, M.A., et al. “Management Practices Associated with Pain in Cattle on Western Canadian Cow-Calf Operations: A Mixed Methods Study”, Journal of Animal Science, volume 95, issue 2, February 2017. academic.oup.com/jas/article-abstract/95/2/958/4702107. Accessed 3 December 2022.

Neethirajan, Suresh, and Kemp, Bas. “Digital Livestock Farming”, Sensing and Bio-Sensing Research, volume 32, June 2021. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221418042100013. Accessed 8 December 2022.

“New Poll Shows Support for Animal Protection Rising in the U.S.” National Council for Animal Protection, 2005, 2014. www.ncapweb.org/new-poll-shows-support/. Accessed 3 December 2022.

Pannett, Warren. Personal interview. 4 December 2022.

Selk, Glenn. “Calving Time Management for Beef Cows and Heifers”, Oklahoma State University, January 2018. extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/calving-time-management-for-beef-cows-and-heifers.html. Accessed 27 November 2022.

Spalding, C.E. Veterinary Guide for Animal Owners. pp. 29-35, 63-64

Suszkiw, Jan. “Balancing Beef Production with Biodiversity.” Agricultural Research, volume 65, number 10, October 2017. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A537267379. Accessed 9 Dec. 2022.

Statham, Jonathan. “Dystocia Management”, Merck Veterinary Manual, Medically Reviewed April 2015, Updated October 2022. www.merckvetmanual.com/management-and-nutrition/management-of-reproduction-cattle. Accessed 8 December 2022.

Stempfle, Gregory, et al. “From PPROM to Caul: The Evolution of Membrane Rupture in Mammals”, National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, 28 August 2013. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5121252. Accessed 8 December 2022.

Taylor, Richard B. “The Effects of Off-Road Vehicles on Ecosystems”, Texas Parks and Wildlife, tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_t3200_1081.pdf. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Thomas, Heather Smith. “Moving and Handling Cattle with ATVs or Horses”, Tri-State Livestock News, 11 February 2013. www.tsln.com/news/moving-and-handling-cattle-with-atvs-or-horses. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Storey’s Guide to Raising Beef Cattle. Storey Publishing, LLC. October 29, 2009. pp. 45, 127, 144-145.

Trenkle, Allen, and Willham, R.L. “Beef Production Efficiency”, Science, volume 198, issue 4321, pp. 1009-1015. www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.198.4321.1009. Accessed 5 December 2022.

Vander Plaats, Allison, DVM. “Parturition”, Module 14: Reproduction, L14.3, 14 November 2022, College of the Sequoias, Tulare, CA. Lecture.

Wagner, Kathrin, et al. “Effects of Mother Versus Artificial Rearing During the First 12 Weeks of Life on Challenge Responses of Dairy Cows”, Applied Animal Behavior Science, volume 154, issue 1, 2015. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150428081801.htm. Accessed 7 December 2022.

Webster, A.J.F. “Heat Loss from Cattle with Particular Emphasis on the Effects of Cold”, Heat Loss from Animals and Man: Assessment and Control. The Butterworth Group. Edited by J.L. Monteith and L.E. Mount. pp. 205-279.