Maximizing Calf Performance: Where Do Implants Fit on a Cow-Calf Operation?

Growth implants are among the most researched and cost‑effective technologies in the beef industry, yet adoption on Canadian cow‑calf operations remains low despite similar performance and economic benefits as seen in backgrounding and feedlot cattle. Questions about labour, economics, animal health and confidence with the implant procedure often influence the decision (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Top reasons for not implanting calves, by province

These issues were the focus of a recent Beef Cattle Research Council webinar, “To Implant or Not? What Cow-Calf Producers Need to Know,” featuring Dr. Lauren Younker of TELUS Agriculture and Manitoba beef producer Betty Green of G7 Ranch. The discussions combined research, practical advice and real-world experience to help producers decide whether implants fit their operation.

Understanding Implant Types

Not all growth implants are created equally. There are three primary hormone compounds used in implants, each with a different potency and ideal application time:

• Progestins: synthetic progesterone, considered least potent and provides more subtle effects. They are often used in suckling calves.
• Estrogens: mimic natural estrogen and are considered medium-potency implants.
• Androgens: mimic testosterone and have the highest potency. They are most effective when paired with high‑energy rations and are often used in backgrounding or feedlot finishing.

Due to these differences, Dr. Younker encourages beef producers interested in using implants to discuss the options with their veterinarian and match implant choice to production stage.

“Most cow‑calf producers would implant at branding with either a progestin or an estrogen-type implant,” she said, adding that androgen implants are best reserved for later production stages when the animal’s energy intake is higher.

The Economics of Implanting

One of the strongest arguments for implants is their return on investment (ROI). Implants can increase average daily gain (ADG) by 10-30%, while improving feed efficiency by 5 to 15%.

“We always talk about implants in the feedlot world, and in cow‑calf too, as being one of the highest ROIs that we can have,” Dr. Younker said, adding that “they are the most consistent profit driver available.”

For cow‑calf producers, this performance boost typically translates into heavier calves at weaning, without significantly increasing costs.

In addition to the economic benefits, research from the University of Manitoba has shown implant use resulted in a 3-10% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, a 5-11% reduction in land use, a 5-11% reduction in water use and a 3-8% reduction in ammonia emissions.

What Makes Implants Work and What Doesn’t

Correct placement is critical, as poor implant technique can reduce effectiveness and impact animal welfare.

Proper implantation steps include:

1. Prepare before you begin by reading the label instructions, acquiring the correct products and familiarizing yourself with the implanting applicator.
2. Properly restrain the calf.
3. Inspect the ear to ensure there is no implant already and the ear surface is clean.
4. Wipe or clean soiled hands before handling the applicator.
5. Wipe the needle through a sponge to disinfect it.
6. Pinch the top of the calf’s ear with your index finger and thumb. Place the applicator against the ear at a slight angle, bevel side up.
7. Insert the needle at a flat angle and slide it all the way into the ear, between the skin and cartilage.
8. Slide the needle back out of the ear (about the length of the implant).
9. Pull the trigger to deposit the implant, then withdraw the needle completely.
10. Feel the implant site to ensure the pellet is properly inserted.
11. Clean the needle by dipping into a chlorohexidine solution.

Implanting Heifers: Addressing Fertility Concerns

Despite concerns, heifers that are or could potentially be replacement animals can be safely implanted with no significant impact on conception rate or calving ease, as long as they are only implanted once within the timeframe recommended by the label (typically at least 45 days) and never post-weaning.

Heifers that are implanted at birth, multiple times before weaning or after weaning have had significantly lower conception rates compared to non-implanted heifers and heifers only implanted once before weaning.

A Producer’s Perspective on Growth Implants: G7 Ranch

Betty Green, co-owner and operator with G7 Ranch in Manitoba, has used implants on her operation for more than 30 years. She stresses that “consistency in implant procedures and attention to detail are important to ensure both animal welfare and performance outcomes.” Her experience reinforces the idea that implants work best when they are part of a broader management system to meet production goals.

Making an Informed Decision About Growth Implants

Whether or not implants fit a cow‑calf operation depends on individual goals, labour availability, marketing plans and personal comfort with the practice. As Dr. Younker and Betty Green emphasized, implants are only one tool and should be evaluated alongside overall herd management.

LEARN MORE:

• Growth Implants on Cow-Calf Operations (BCRC topic page)
• Optimizing Feedlot Efficiency (BCRC topic page)
• Can We Replace Growth Promotants? (BCRC article)
• Growth Promotants and the Environment (BCRC article)

Sharing or reprinting BCRC posts is welcome and encouraged. Please credit the Beef Cattle Research Council, provide the website address, www.BeefResearch.ca, and let us know you have chosen to share the article by emailing us at [email protected].

The BCRC is funded by a portion of the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off.

Your questions, comments and suggestions are welcome. Contact us directly or spark a public discussion by posting your thoughts below.