Keeping Calves the S.A.M.E.

Written by: Matt Woolfolk, ASA Director of Performance Programs

The topic of proper data reporting is one that is very important, yet also can be overwhelming and a hassle to many breeders. Sometimes, it’s difficult to know what to do when turning in your weights and data to ASA. I’ve learned that no matter how many times this topic gets covered, it’s usually not enough times! It’s been a couple years since we discussed this topic in the Shorthorn Country, so it might be time for a good review.

The best memory device I’ve seen to help with contemporary grouping is the acronym S.A.M.E.

S.A.M.E.: Sex, Age, Management, Environment. Simply put, cattle that are treated the same should be contemporary grouped the same!

A contemporary group (CG) is the largest it can ever be when you put them together during calving season. That makes it extra important to get your contemporary groups correct at birth to build on as the calves go through life. All the calves born in the same season should be grouped together, provided they were run under the same management. If one set of cows is on full feed while the others just grazed, then the calves from those cows should be split accordingly. When inputting calf data, Digital Beef will separate male and females calves into their own groups for you. You can use the “Season” dropdown menu to differentiate groups from each other within your herd (like the fed cow pasture vs the grazing pasture). The “A, B, C and D” designations don’t necessarily correspond to actual seasons, but rather are just a method to input your different groups the way they need to be.

It’s inevitable that animals will be removed from a contemporary group over time. Whether it’s a calf that gets sick and requires extra attention, or a couple calves are brought to the barn as show prospects, group those cattle that get treated differently than the rest as their own contemporaries. If you bring in a bull calf and start feeding him a show ration to prep for state fair, you would expect him to outweigh your calves that are on pasture and light creep. It would not be a fair representation of the data to keep him in the same CG as all his buddies that didn’t come to the show barn. The show calves would need to be removed from the main CG and separated into their own smaller group. Contemporary groups are not a “mix and match” task, where you can pull animals out and put them back in once they’re back in the same pasture again. Once an animal leaves a CG, it can’t go back to the old one. The bull calf you took to state fair can be turned out in the development lot with the other yearlings after his show career, but he remains in his own CG for data recording purposes.

Even if all your calves don’t grow and perform like you hoped, it’s important to submit the data on all calves, heavy and light. There’s a reason it’s called WHOLE Herd Reporting. It’s fairly common for cattlemen to not report their worst calves, because they don’t want to bring down the group average and have other breeders see their “bad” calves. If all the calves are treated the same, then ALL the calves should be reported, good, bad or ugly. If you are a WHR breeder, the assessment fee on your cows covers the registration of her calf, so choosing not to submit the poor calves is not really a way to lower your registration bills. If you don’t want to give the weaker calves a registration number, you can simply uncheck the “Register?” box when submitting calf data into Digital Beef, and the system will record your calves with a “U” number and not fully register them.

A pitcher who can throw an 87 mph fastball doesn’t look very good in the population of professional baseball players, where 95 mph throwers are pretty common. If you compare him to the entire population of men in the country, that 87mph heater looks pretty good again! That’s what happens when you don’t record those less than desirable calves in your crop. It doesn’t help your best show just how good they really are!

The chart below gives a visual example of how much effect removing the bottom can have on performance ratios, and in turn, EPD calculations.

For a contemporary group to be an effective sire evaluation tool, there needs to be more than one sire represented in the group. While you can still make comparisons of the individuals and their dams, a CG with only one sire doesn’t tell you very much on the bull. All the good performing calves are his, but so are all the bad ones! The best way to have multiple sires in a group would be to incorporate AI into your breeding program, then turn those cows out with a walking herd sire afterwards.

The task of contemporary grouping can be confusing, cumbersome, and downright boring for some breeders! However, proper CGs are also crucial and necessary for getting the best data possible into the Shorthorn genetic evaluation. As Shorthorn breeders, we should all want the best genetic evaluations possible. If you have questions or need assistance, please feel free to reach out and ask. The worst questions are the ones that are never asked.

Are You Listening?

Written by: Matt Woolfolk, Director of Performance Programs

The title of the article is always my opportunity to grab your attention, hoping you’ll read my monthly column. In this instance, I’m not worried about if you are listening to me, but rather the customers that show up to your farms and ranches to buy cattle. There’s one media publication that is trying to get the bull customer to talk about what they want, and their report gives us a chance to listen. 

For the past six years, BEEF Magazine has put together a project titled The Seedstock 100. The project was printed in the January 2020 issue of BEEF Magazine. The Seedstock 100 sets out to identify those producers across the United States who merchandise the most bulls into the marketplace. This list of elite bull marketers ranges from selling 230 bulls in 2019 to almost 4,000 young sires, and can be found in 23 states coast to coast. Within the breeding programs of the Seedstock 100, there are 33 different breeds, composites, or hybrid breeds of cattle listed. Unfortunately, neither Shorthorn nor ShorthornPlus are included in those 33 bull breed types. 

As part of their publishing of the Seedstock 100 list, BEEF also included some findings from a producer survey in regards to genetic makeup, purchasing demands, and management practices in their operations. The summary article compiled by BEEF writer Wes Ishmael was pretty enlightening. I encourage you to go read the whole report, if you can. While treating the responses to any survey as pure gospel is always a cautionary tale, it is still interesting to look at the responses from commercial producers in hopes of identifying a potential trend.

According to respondents to this survey, 72% of their cow herds were classified as mostly straightbred British or British crossbred females. From that subset of cattlemen, 97% of those straight and British crossbred cattle were classified as Angus (73%), Red Angus (15%) or Hereford (9%). When it comes to bull purchasing, the responses to this survey indicate that those same three breeds make up 84% of the bulls most recently purchased. Those same three breeds also dominate the responses for the breed of choice for bull purchases in the next three years.  When asked if they planned to change the breed composition of their cow herd over the next five years, only 22% indicated that they were planning to do so. Eighty-five percent of responses indicated raising their own replacement females, while 68% market their feeder cattle at auction. In terms of retained ownership, 18% indicated that they keep ownership of their calves. 

When it comes to data and information to make a bull buying decision, birth and calving ease information are most valued in this survey. Seventy eight percent want to know the actual birth weight of the calf, while more respondents want the EPD for Calving Ease Direct (77%) than they do Birth Weight (71%). Buyers prefer an actual weaning weight (63%) over a 205-day adjusted weight (55%), and 62% of buyers want access to a WW EPD. Albeit by a small margin, more responses indicated wanting a disposition score over a yearling weight (54% vs 51%). When it comes to the use of selection indexes, 56% of the respondents “routinely” use these tools to identify potential bulls to buy. In terms of priority of index type, maternal (44%) was the most popular, followed by end product/carcass (39%) and multipurpose (31%). Eighty-two percent of responses say that the information provided to them by the seedstock producer is understandable, while only 14% say that the information is too complicated. Only one in four responses indicated they needed a genomic profile on a bull, while 46% of responses use genomic data in their bull selection. That tells me that while they may not require the information, if genomic information is available, they are fairly likely to use it. As Wes Ishmael said himself in the article, “The idea that about half of bull buyers use genomic data in selection would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.”

While this is a lot of information to digest, I think it lends some wisdom on what the customer is thinking. Truthfully, I don’t agree with everything that we see in the results of this survey, but that’s just the number crunching side of me showing. However, if gaining commercial acceptance as a breed is an avenue we would like to pursue, I feel that knowing the mindset of the customer can help you get there. That is the reasoning behind ASA collecting data at NCBA Convention and in our own commercial survey.  The dominance of British genetics is not a surprise, and certainly offers us a challenge as a British breed fighting in the 3% that the Big Three don’t occupy. However, with the survey indicating that one out of five cattlemen are looking to make changes to their herd’s genetic makeup, opportunity is available for a breed that offers unique, useful traits. With the increasing value being placed on docility (and Shorthorn’s natural propensity to for good docility), there might be an opening for the right kind of Shorthorn cattle to make a market impact. While nobody but your customer can tell you what the right kind of Shorthorn is, the responses to this survey show what type of information a bull buyer asks for and the type of cow herd most bulls are getting used in. Fortunately for you, being a part of the American Shorthorn Association offers you the opportunity to give them all the things they asked for through this BEEF Magazine survey.

Online AJSA Fundraiser

Funding the Future is the annual AJSA online fundraiser held in February. The AJSA junior board gathers semen, embryos, photography packages and more to auction online. The proceeds benefit the AJSA and National Junior Shorthorn Show & Youth Conference.

Date: February 18, 2020

Sale Link:

**If you are interested in donating to the AJSA, please contact**

ASA Board Elects First Female President

During the American Shorthorn Association Annual Meeting the board elected new officers to serve for the 2019-2020 term.

Nancy Grathwohl-Heter of Kansas, made Shorthorn history when the board elected her to serve as the first female president of the ASA.

Nancy has spent her life raising and showing Shorthorn cattle which has grown her passion for the breed. She served on the American Junior Shorthorn Association board of directors from 1994-1997, serving as president her last year. Nancy and her husband Ryan, run DTR Cattle Company in Raymond, Kansas. Their two kids, Josie and Ryder, exhibit Shorthorns at local, state and national shows. Her love for the breed is evident in her dedication to serving on the board and raising Shorthorns.

“I am very honored to serve as the President of the ASA board,” Nancy said. “Growing up in the Shorthorn breed, I have looked up to members of our association and feel the opportunities available to junior members have helped develop me into the person I am today. I am looking forward to this next year as I get to work with my fellow board members for the betterment of the breed.”

With almost 150 years of history, the ASA continues to develop a passion in its members to serve and grow the Shorthorn breed.

New Board Members and Officers Elected

During the American Shorthorn Association Annual Meeting on November 23, delegates from all over the country gathered to elect new ASA board members.

The nominating committee submitted three candidates for the available positions. Jerrell Crow from Oklahoma, Lee Miller from Ohio, and John Russell from Texas were elected to each serve a three-year term. The board elected new officers for the nine-member board. The new president of the board is Nancy Grathwohl-Heter of Kansas, the first female president of the American Shorthorn Association. The vice-president is Hugh Mooney of California and the executive director is Dave Greenhorn of Ohio. They serve alongside Joe Bales of Tennessee, Toby Jordan of Indiana, John Sonderman of Nebraska, Jerrell Crow of Oklahoma, Lee Miller of Ohio, and John Russell of Texas.

Annual Meeting Overview

On November 22 and 23 more than 100 attendees gathered for the 2019 ASA Annual Meeting – Forum & Awards Banquet at the Hilton Kansas City Airport in Kansas City, Missouri.

On Friday, November 22, attendees chose a workshop taught by ASA staff. Matt Woolfolk shared how selection indexes are created for genetic evaluations. Heather Lange and Emily Velisek explained the ASA registry and answered related questions. Shelby Diehm described the opportunities ASA provides to members to market Shorthorn cattle and Amy Sampson of Shorthorn Country spoke about magazine advertising.

After breakout sessions, members were encouraged to attend committee meetings. The ASA Genetic Evaluation Committee, ASA Commercial Acceptance Committee, ASA ShorthornPlus/Composite Committee, and ASA Promotion Committee had members eager to contribute ideas to submit to the ASA board and staff. The 150th Anniversary Committee is actively planning for the 150th celebration to begin at the annual meeting in 2021.

Later that afternoon, the “Building a Positive Breed Image” portion of the Annual Meeting began with a panel consisting of Virgin Huseman of Kansas, Marty Lueck of Missouri and Randy McCabe of Kansas. They discussed how to build a commercial image. The panel was followed by Patrick Wall of Iowa State Extension, reviewing the ISU Shorthorn feed efficiency heifer project. The evening concluded with Eric Grant of Grant Company showing attendees some of the new ASA marketing campaign his team has been working on since July.

On Saturday, the morning began with Matt Woolfolk, ASA Director of Performance Programs, giving a breed performance update. He was followed by Dwight Williams, of ABS Global, speaking about A.I. Sire Procurement. Next was Donnell Brown of R.A. Brown Ranch sharing Building Blocks to a Strong Breed. He was followed by a panel of Derek Jungels of North Dakota, Paul Hill of Ohio and Jim Husz of Missouri, discussing Breeders’ Impact on a Breed.

That afternoon following speakers, the annual meeting was in session. The ASA auditor began with a financial report and told members that ASA is in great financial condition. Montie Soules, Executive Secretary/CEO of ASA, gave the state of association report. The highlights of his report being a 65% increase in new junior and senior membership in the last year. The top five states for registrations are Ohio with 1,219 registrations, Indiana with 1,196 registrations, Iowa with 1,124 registrations, Kansas with 1,010 registrations, and Illinois with 940 registrations. Another major highlight is that ShorthornPlus registrations are 28% of total registrations. The nominating committee submitted three candidates for the available positions on the ASA board. Jerrell Crow of Oklahoma, Lee Miller of Ohio and John Russell of Texas were elected to serve a three-year term. The board met to elect new officers for the nine-member board. The new president of the board is Nancy Grathwohl-Heter of Kansas, the first woman president. The vice-president is Hugh Mooney and the executive director is Dave Greenhorn of Ohio. They serve alongside Joe Bales of Tennessee, Toby Jordan of Indiana, John Sonderman of Nebraska, Jerrell Crow of Oklahoma, Lee Miller of Ohio and John Russell of Texas.

On Saturday evening there were more than 130 people in attendance for the awards banquet. Members were recognized for Century Club, Pacer Performance Awards and Show Awards. Bruce E. Brooks of Oklahoma was awarded the Merit Award. Keith H. Lauer of Kansas was presented the Heritage Award. Mark W. P. Gordon and Phillip & Linda Bowman were recognized as Builders of the Breed.

The Annual Meeting will be held in Louisville, Kentucky, during the North American International Livestock Exposition, in 2020. We hope to see you there!

Displaying Genetic Conditions on a Pedigree

written by Matt Woolfolk, Director of Performance Programs

Genetic conditions are certainly something that we have to pay attention to in the Shorthorn breed. Whether it is TH, PHA, or DS, each of these can cause detrimental effects in your herd if they are not closely monitored. I’m not going to go into the specifics of each of these conditions and how they can impact a calf in this article. Instead, I will focus on some of the nomenclature and symbols that you might see when researching pedigrees in DigitalBeef or if you look at your registration certificates received from ASA.

When studying cattle in DigitalBeef, you might have noticed various colored notations of THC, DSF, or other similar abbreviations beside animal names on a pedigree. If you didn’t know what they signified, you are in luck with this article! There are three colors that you will see for these abbreviations: red, green and yellow. I will explain below what they signify.

Red: If you see a THC, PHAC, or DSC on an animal’s registration certificate or on its Pedigree tab of DigitalBeef, then that animal has been tested and confirmed as a carrier for whichever condition you see noted on the paper. In order to have an animal test as a carrier of TH, PHA, or DS, one of the parents must be a carrier of that condition. Two parents that are tested free should not be able to produce a THC, PHAC, or DSC calf. As always, extra precaution should be taken in regards to breeding 2 carriers of the same genetic condition to each other, as doing so gives you a 25% chance of producing a homozygous calf that will exhibit the signs of TH, PHA, or DS. I would not recommend breeding two carriers of the same genetic condition to each other.

Green: A THF, PHAF, or DSF on a registration paper or in the Pedigree tab on DigitalBeef indicate that the animal in question has been tested free of the specific genetic condition. Breeding a THF, PHAF, or DSF cow to a bull that is a carrier for any of these conditions CAN produce a calf that is a carrier, but the resulting calf being affected with TH, PHA, or DS will not happen. An animal MUST be tested as free of these conditions to receive the THF, PHAF, or DSF designation on a paper or in the system. Animals that are “free by pedigree” without being tested will not appear with this designation on the paper or in the system.

Yellow: The most difficult of the colored markers to understand, an animal with a TH, PHA, or DS on their registration paper or on the Pedigree tab on their Animal Info in DigitalBeef is listed as an untested potential carrier for the designated condition. An animal with any of these designations is NOT tested for the genetic condition listed in yellow. Instead, these animals have a tested carrier (THC, PHAC, or DSC) within 4 generations in their pedigree, without an animal tested free (THF, PHAF, or DSF) between them on the pedigree. For example, a calf is listed as PHA because his great-grandsire is PHAC, and none of the cattle in the direct line back to that great-grandsire in the pedigree have been tested as PHAF. The simplest way to remove the golden letters from a pedigree is to test the animal in question to officially determine if they are free or a carrier for the genetic condition. If an animal does not have a yellow designation, that means there are no tested carriers within 4 generations on the pedigree. That does not mean that you might not find a carrier 5 or more generations back. The DigitalBeef system only checks back for generations to signify a potential carrier.

Genetic conditions in your herd can easily be managed by doing your homework and taking extra precaution in your breeding program. Hopefully, these color-coded designations on your papers and in DigitalBeef help you when you’re making those decisions to identify animals that are tested for genetic conditions, or those that might be worth the investment to find out their status with a genetic test.

With this being the December issue, I want to take the time to wish you all a Merry Christmas. The year 2019 has not been an easy one in the agricultural community. From weather to policy to market volatility, there has been a lot of difficulty thrown at farmers and ranchers. However, this time of year we still get to celebrate the greatest gift that we could ever dream of receiving: Jesus Christ was born on this Earth (in a barn of all places!), sent here as our Savior. Even if times are tough, that’s a gift still worth celebrating.

Whole Herd Reporting Facts and Tips

written by: Matt Woolfolk, ASA Director of Performance Programs

The end of October through the month of November is as jam-packed a time-frame as you will find on the Shorthorn calendar. The American Royal, North American, ASA Annual Meeting, and several Shorthorn sales all occur in a 5 week window this fall; and of course there is always Thanksgiving on the November agenda. With plenty of events across the country still to attend, I hope to see many of you somewhere on the road between now and the end of the year.

It’s certainly hard to think about next year right now, but if you are able to plan ahead, it could be beneficial to you when it comes time to register your 2020 calf crop with the ASA Whole Herd Reporting (WHR) program. Some of the most common questions that we get in the office on an almost daily basis relate to the WHR program. With WHR inventories being mailed out soon, I will take the opportunity to highlight the WHR process and timeline.

Your 2020 WHR inventories will be mailed the first of November. The WHR inventory is where you will account for all active breeding females in your herd and remove any cows that have left your place over the past year. There are two ways to complete your WHR for 2020. You can fill out the paper form you receive and mail it back to ASA with payment, or you can log in to your Digital Beef account and do your assessments there; as well as settle your balance by credit card while on Digital Beef. It is important when removing cows from your inventory to use as accurate of a disposal code as possible. Check the list of disposal codes when updating your inventory to indicate the reason for her removal from the herd (Death, sold for old age, fertility issues, etc.). The disposal codes will be printed with your inventory or available as the drop down menu from the “Dispose/Exempt” button if you choose to do your assessments on the computer.

Yearling heifers that are not going to calve in 2020 do not have to be included on the WHR assessment inventory. To exempt those heifers from your inventory, use the code number 51 “Active-WHR Exempt, Shorthorn heifer held from breeding”. Doing it this way will keep those heifers active so you can do a WHR assessment on them when they have that first calf in 2021. If there is a heifer listed on your inventory that has been culled and will not calve in your herd in 2021, use the proper disposal code to permanently remove her from your account.

The fee for a WHR assessment on a breeding female is $20. If you get your assessments completed before January 10, a $4 per head discount is applied, making the assessment fee $16 per breeding female. From January 10 to March 1, the $20 per head rate applies.

After March 1 through the remainder of the 2020 calendar year, the WHR assessment fee is $25 per breeding female. When you do your WHR assessments for your herd, that fee gives you some value on each of your breeding females. The registration of her calf is included in that WHR assessment fee, as well as covering the first transfer of that calf after you sell it. The WHR assessment only covers the first transfer of the calf, and any future transfers of that animal will be charged to the seller.

While it’s not the typical holiday season activity, getting your WHR assessments done before the early January cutoff is worth the time to complete it in exchange for your peace of mind and break on your wallet when it comes time to start registering calves. Being up to date on WHR will bring one less headache to the calf registration process. The monetary savings of getting ahead of the curve on completing the WHR for 2020 are also noteworthy. We all love saving a little money!

If I am not lucky enough to run into you this month, I hope you and your loved ones have a happy Thanksgiving. Even in the tough economic times we are facing in production agriculture, we still have plenty of blessings from the Lord above. Enjoy the time with those that you care about, and I hope you make sure there is beef on the menu!

At the Starting Gate

Written by: Matt Woolfolk, ASA Director of Performance Programs

When I am struggling to come up with a topic for this column like I was this month, I usually look at the previous month’s article (to make sure I don’t copy it again) and the article from the same month in the previous year; hoping for a topic that was relevant the previous year. My September 2018 article opened with, “To be honest with you, I had a hard time coming up with something to write about for this issue.” I was successful in discovering a pattern: that the September issue is a common time for writer’s block! The best way for me to get rolling in these cases is to start writing what’s on my mind and hope I can tie it back to cattle eventually. That method worked out well for this month.

I spent an August weekend in Des Moines with friends at the Prairie Meadows racetrack. It was a fun way to wrap up the summer before heading into the chaos that is fall sale and show season. With everyone on the trip working in purebred cattle marketing, we resigned ourselves to the fact that we won’t be able to get together again until Denver. If you invite someone in our line of work to a social event on a fall weekend, don’t expect them to show up unless it’s your sale day!

Horse racing is affectionately known as “The Sport of Kings”, but I’m not sure that moniker really fits. Some of you tune in for the Kentucky Derby or other big races and see the high-class party atmosphere, but you may not realize that everyday horse racing is a blue-collar profession. The barns at Prairie Meadows are full of horsemen trying to make their living winning races. While we all tried to find the next longshot winner, the conversation at the table turned to cattle.

One of the guys at the table made the observation, ‘You know, this sport deals with a lot of the same things that we do in the cattle business.” What followed was a lengthy discussion about some of the similarities in horse racing and the beef cattle business. I’ve outlined some of the biggest commonalities in the rest of this article.

Breeding and Genetics: Breeding racehorses is a combination of art, livestock breeding and luck. What makes the Thoroughbred breeding industry much more challenging, is that all matings must be natural service in order to be eligible for registration. Imagine if we had that restriction in the registered beef business! Most of the Thoroughbred breeding in the US is based around Lexington, Kentucky. However, many state Thoroughbred organizations offer special races and incentive programs for horses bred and raced in their state. We watched several races which were open only to Iowa-bred horses while at Prairie Meadows, and they even host a special day of racing to celebrate the Iowa-breds at the end of the season. Similar to our livelihood, it’s important to find a niche for your breeding program where you can fit and be successful.

Conformation: I’m not an expert in racehorse phenotype, but one of my friends has some knowledge of what one should look like. He certainly had a “look” or type that he was studying
for when the horses paraded out onto the track before each race. It didn’t necessarily help him cash any winning tickets. I think as cattlemen we have a better grasp on what type of animal will be a winner in our herds than the horseplayer at the track.

Statistics and Data: Open up a race program and you will find more data than you know what to do with on each race. There are statistics on jockey and trainer performance, as well as recaps of recent past races for every horse in the race. To a novice, it can be a numerical overload, but it can also helpful to find the winning horse and place the right wager. Much akin to our own performance data, EPDs and selection indexes, the information in a racing program can be beneficial if you know how to use it!

Betting Style: Everyone at the track has their own methodology to picking a winner. Some watch the horses in the paddock, while others study the stats in the program. Some play by gut feeling or color of the horse. Regardless, the destination is the same for everyone: to win some money! Study all the different cattle operations out there and you’ll see a similar trend. No two cattlemen go about things exactly the same, even with the same end goal in mind.

Compassion: The crowds are not very big at Prairie Meadows, except for the 10 minutes before and during a race. The spectator numbers grow then because all the people who work in the stables make their way over to watch their horses run their race. Grooms, trainers, and other staff all gather near the finish line to cheer on their horses. You can tell that they care deeply for the animals they are responsible for. As soon as every race ended, they bounced into action to cool their horse down and get them back to the barn for post-race care. What may just be “the #5 horse” to the racegoer is a special athlete with a name and a unique personality to the people who care for them, just like we view some of our cow herds.

Horse racing has always been one of my favorite sports. After the trip to Prairie Meadows and the discussion of how similar it is to our beloved industry, I think I’ve developed an even deeper appreciation for their business. Midwestern horsemen and cattlemen are a lot more alike than we might think, with both groups made up of dedicated, hard-working people trying to make a living in the industry they love. You also have to be a pretty good gambler to make it in either business.

Interns Final Days

Our time here at the American Shorthorn Association has flown by and we’re sad to say goodbye, but so grateful for our time we have been in the office. We have all learned many new skills and are so happy to have had this adventure. Working in a breed association and the agricultural industry has allowed us real life experience and has given us a taste of future career possibilities. Although we all come from a different breed, the Shorthorn breed is something special to us now.

To say goodbye to the staff, we had a little potluck to celebrate our internship before we finished our final days. We took our favorite recipe from the NJSS beef-cook off contest and prepared it for the office as the main dish. We made grilled steak taco’s with poblano-mango salsa. Our apartment doesn’t have a grilled, so we improvised and cooked them stove top. After cooking, we cut them into bit size chunks that were great size to put in tortillas. We had all the “fixings” to build your own taco and the other staff made side dishes and desserts. We had an array of Mexican dishes that went along with the tacos perfectly. It was a great time to enjoy the company of the office. Below you can find the recipe for the steak taco’s!

As we say goodbye to the office, we would like to thank the staff for putting up with us and providing such a fun and enjoyable work atmosphere. As we part ways, Wade and Wyatt will head back to finish their senior year of college and Faith will move home and continue her search for her dream job. We thank the ASA and their members for having such an amazing association and wish you the best of luck in your future as you continue to build the success of the Shorthorn breed.


Grilled Steak Tacos with Poblano Mango Salsa


1 pound of boneless steak

2 medium poblano peppers

1 medium onion, cut into 1/2” thick slices

2 cloves garlic – minced

1 teaspoon ground cumin

1 medium mango

1/4 cup chopped fresh cilantro

1/4 cup fresh lime juice

8 small corn tortillas (6-7 inch diameter)

Fresh Cilantro Sprigs & lime wedges (optional)


1) Grill peppers and onions over medium heat for 10 to 15 minutes, or until tender, set aside

2) Combine cumin and garlic, press onto steaks. Place steak on grill over medium heat, cook for 8-13 minutes.

3) Remove and discard skins, stems and seeds from peppers when Coll enough to handle. Chop peppers and onions. Combine veggies, mango, chopped cilantro, lime juice and salt in a medium bowl. Set aside.

4) Place Tortillas on grill. Grill for 30 seconds or until heated through and browned lightly.

5) Carve steak and season with additional salt. Top tortillas with equal amounts of beef and mango salsa. Garnish with cilantro sprigs and lime wedges, if desired.