 I'm Zach Carlson, so I'm based in Fargo and have been with NDSU for a little over two years now, so fairly new to the program. Tonight, I'm going to talk about implants and kind of how those fit into backgrounding operations. There's some newer developments in terms of labeling of implants and where they can actually be applied given some new regulations by the FDA. We'll kind of touch on the value of them and then get into some of those new updates. Implants are a natural hormone or an analog, a synthetic of a natural hormone. They've been around for a long time. FDA approved them in 1956, and we've been doing continuous research on them ever since. We still do plenty of implant research throughout the university systems and commercial trial data still. They've been probably the most research technology thus far in the beef cattle segment. We feel pretty confident about the results that we get from that and the repeatability over time in that research. I go, of course, these are placed subtaneously in the ear, right the back of the ear, specifically in the middle third, both horizontally and vertically on the ear, and I'll show you a diagram of that in a little bit. What they do is send a cascade of activity to improve, average the gain, and feed efficiency. You can kind of see those values there are rough estimates of improvement in the average daily gain. This statistic is a little dated, but probably still relatively accurate, and that's more than 90% of feedback cattle are implanted at least once in their lifetime. It's heavily used technology to improve our beef production, and how it does that is through the increase in protein deposition. It shifts the growth curve, and what I mean by that is it essentially puts gain back towards protein and muscle development and away from fat deposition. Particularly in our background in diets, we're not at a finishing state yet. Our diets don't have enough energy, that's not our intentions. Kim mentioned earlier about making sure we're not getting our calves too fleshy in that sense, as there's discounts there for background and cattle. In that sense, really it's not as much of an issue in terms of worrying about the impacts on marbling and everything in our background in diets, as it's really focused on protein deposition at that point in the calf's growth cycle, and so it really just kind of helps stimulate that muscle development and further developing those muscles. Then, of course, that results in that body composition difference. I wanted to get right into some of the numbers and the improvements that we see. Here at the top, we have days-on feed, and then on the left-hand side here, you'll see a no implant using a row growth in a thin effect. Throughout my presentation here, I'll mention a lot of brand names and things like that, and that's really because there's three major implant manufacturers, Alenko Animal Health, Mark Animal Health, and then Zoetis. Oftentimes, it gets specific later on when I talk about the FDA label changes. We'll talk specifically about which implants those are actually addressing currently. Anyway, you can see here these cattle were about £100. This is a culmination of different studies, so this isn't one particular study. It's pooling a bunch of different results that looked at the same thing. That's why those initial body weights are those weights in the trial were PDA a little bit. Anyway, you can see here the average daily gain almost near that three mark, but the difference here being I've averaged the difference between the two implant treatments versus no implant. It's just the average difference here between those, and so it's about the contents of a pound. It fits right in that 10% improvement in average daily gain. Then here, we see an improvement in feed-to-gain. Lower number is better, less feed per pound of beef that we're putting on. In that sense, you can see improvement in feed gain without really any adjustments to feed in faith in that sense. With that result over 140 days at two-tenths of pound, that net £30 roughly of additional body weight from those two implant programs, so Ralph Rower, that's an effect. We'll come back to that number in terms of what that means in dollars, but I do want to share where I got this information. This is a great resource for anyone that's interested in looking at potential implant programs that they might want to implement in your own systems. Here, if you look to the Merck Texas Tech University North American PDA implant database, you can select here. This is just a screenshot of the website, but you can go up here and select an implant study and look at the differences, and that's where I got those values that we just looked at. It's a great resource here. I think this is a great study that demonstrates maybe a perception that we have and that implants can wreck a calf and send them down the wrong path in terms of growth. Gentry and others here looked at that, so they basically set calves up to fail, because with implant programs, what you need to make sure you do is you work towards more concentrated levels. You start at a moderate or a weaker dose and you work towards higher concentrations as that calf moves throughout its growth. As we go from a suckling calf implant to a backgrounding or a stalker type implant to finishing, we're increasing the dose, concentration of the dose, but it's important not to go too far, too fast. We have two or excuse me, three segments in a sense, so none, right, where calves are not given an implant at 45 days old. We're talking about a calf in the sense, right, a suckling calf, or a very, very aggressive implant here by design, Cinevex lung graft, so that would be at the combination of estradiol and PBA, a very aggressive form of implant, especially for a calf that's 45 days old, and then we have conventional, right, which some might use Cinevex choice as a suckling calf implant in some regards, or maybe a row grow would fit really well in here as well. Then wean those calves at 221 days of age, and then followed up with a Cinevex choice in the backgrounding, then move to Cinevex plus and the finisher, and then harvested those catalytic, well over a year old. Okay, so at the bottom here are those body weight, so days of age here at 221, that's the weaning weight. You can see that aggressive implant definitely added body weight in that sense, so some might consider that, or look at this as a means of that implant worked, and it certainly did, but I go back to that whole building a implant program from the start, and working your way towards more concentrated forms, and so what you can see here is by 266, right, started that backgrounding case, those still, those calves maintained that body weight, but by the time they started their finisher, that had, you know, that weight was gone, so these calves over here, the conventional they had shipped off already, but I think there's a good comparison at the beginning, but you can see here that there was no benefits by adding that finisher implant, that Cinevex plus, they added that at 351 days, and that resulted in no further improvements, which time over time, we know there should have been improvements in that situation, by adding that last implant, suggesting that, you know, those animals had been used way too aggressive implant right up front at the beginning, and therefore as a result, we're not responsive to that last implant during that finishing phase. Another perception that I wanted to talk about is the impact of implanted calves at sail barns, in that sense, so there's been some good work here done, two studies combined here, dating from 2010 to 2018, and they used superior livestock options to evaluate implants in blue bars and no implants in red bars, so you can see across years the difference in average price, and then I've listed those prices here, so you can actually see, and ultimately there's really no real significant difference between those prices, between those, you know, even as we think about selling your background to calves, maybe, you know, as yearlings, and going to the sail barn with those, implanting those calves, done right, doesn't affect them in subsequent stages of production, as well as shouldn't bring any lower price relative to cattle not implanted. Again, you could be, you know, certified into a natural program or organic program, and in that sense, by all means, but I always encourage producers, if you're not capitalizing on some value-added program, such as using implants, you certainly want to take advantage of one of these avenues. From that 2010 to 2013 data, there was 17,000 lots sold through Superior Livestock Auction here in North Dakota, and of those, 40% were implanted. I don't know what that number is now, I'd be very curious to find out, but that was the data back then 10 years ago. So these are the steer implants, again, building up from top of the screen to the bottom, and building up in concentration. So basically, when we're talking backgrounding cattle, we're talking about these ones here. So the estrogen only, or the mild combination, in that sense. So the ones at the bottom of the screen would be fit for the finishing period, and again, so using being strategic in that sense. Same thing here with feedlot heifer implants, and having estrogen-based ones at the top there, and then mild combinations and some moderate combinations. There could be included in a backgrounding, your background program. So how long do they last? Well, you got to look at days after implantation, right? So at the bottom here, you can kind of see, we go 50 days up to 100 to 150 days after implanting those cattle. And basically what you see is in concentrations would be the level of the hormone in the blood. And so basically, you can kind of see that there's essentially, we're reaching kind of that lower threshold between somewhere between maybe 60 to 100 days, right? And so it's really important when you think about multiple implant strategies, going from a growing into a finishing, you never want to run out of implant in that sense, because those cattle will just, they might start to plateau on gain. So you don't want to run out, but you certainly don't want to implant too soon. So there's a delicate balance there, but in terms of kind of understanding how many days your cattle are going to be on feed when you intend to market them and all those things that all plays into what implant you should look at and utilize. And just because you really don't want to run out of implant before you're done, kind of, or before they move on to the next stage. These by all means are not accurate prices, but they're relatively just to give an idea. So basically those implants we're talking about for the backgrounding would be in that three to $4 range. So I just kind of wanted to show those. And then I'm going to use a $4 implant in this situation. So why we implant, we add, we improve our daily gain, we improve feed efficiency. So you're getting more out of your feed, right? And you're producing more beef with that feed. So here we have, if an implant says $4 and we put on, again, that 30 pounds, right, that initial example I showed you, we added 30 pounds over 140 day feeding periods. And so at $2.30, right, $230 a hundred weight, that number we've been using all night and take that time at those 30 pounds that you added, right, compared to a non-implanted calf. And you're going to grow $69, right? You take that $4 implant out of the situation, right? And you've got a 16 to one ROI in that sense. So really, time over time, like I said, we know a lot about implants and we can expect to see differences. You know, it's, you usually have to do a study, right, where you've got no implanted kettle next to implanted kettle to really know if there's a difference. If you implant all your kettle, it's really hard to understand if it worked or not, because you don't have any comparison, right, of what calves without an implant would have done in that sense. So okay, it's important though that you're going to utilize implants that you do it properly. Once you know the technique and practice proper sanitation, it's a really useful tool. However, if you don't practice proper sanitation, really, you could be wasting that $4 in the sense. So during processing of calves, implanting should be the right limiting step. It should not be the, you know, you need to take time and make sure you're that you've sanitized the needle effectively, right? And that their the ear is clean in that sense. And so again, where we're implanting is going to be right in the middle third, both vertically and horizontally in the ear. And the, I'm sure you all are familiar if you do implant with that blue solution right there. One thing you need to know is check the label on the chlorhexidine solution, because more than likely it's in concentrated form and that you do not need it in concentrated form to sanitize or sterilize the needle. Really, all you need is one of the empty jugs and fill it up to that bottom ridge with your blue solution for the rest with water. That in itself is going to be enough to sanitize the needle. Then what you need is one of these grout sponges, don't use a regular kitchen sponge, use one of these grout ones, you can get them at any hardware store typically, use a paint tray, and then have a briar. And that that grout sponge goes in the paint tray, and then you that's what you'll be wiping the needle off with. Not only do you want to wipe off blood or anything like that, you want to make sure you get the hair off the needle. Because as you can imagine, you're a lot of hair ends up getting caught on that needle, and you could end up embedding that hair in with the implant under the skin, which can just cause potential infection in that situation. You want to avoid implanting cattle in a rain event. Cattle that are dirty, and it's raining, you're going to you're exposing, right, the inside of that ear. And when it's raining, that dirty water that's coming off is going to go into that space where that implant is and cause another potential for infection. So avoid rainy days as much as you possibly can. Make sure you're sanitizing that needle in between. You do not need to change the needle, except for when you're starting to notice getting it dull or if you ram it accidentally into the shoot or something like that. Okay, so I already talked about, you know, you got to it takes practice, right, to get proper placement of that. You want to make sure you don't inject that implant too fast, because what you end up doing is crushing some of the pellets, and the pellets are designed, of course, to be whole. Because if you crush them, they'll be absorbed faster in that payout period of 60 to 100 days will end up becoming really short in that sense. Proper location is important because you don't want to implant and then have somebody follow up with putting an ear tag right through that implant, right, you'll just crush the implant, or you'll kind of create potential scarring in that area, you're relying on blood flow to absorb that implant from the back of the ear. And so you want to make sure you don't embed it into the cartilage too, right, you go in parallel with the cartilage under the skin. And anytime, right, an implant won't work, you can tell because that ear will abscess, right, and be hard, more than likely, and leads to basically the animal walling off that area. And then your implant will be completely intact on the back of the ear and rendered useless. Okay, so with the time that I have left, I want to talk about some of the changes that occurred this past summer. So first and foremost, it's really important that you check your implant labels. Because these new changes have now required some label change. And in order to understand what implants you may have. So if you have implants from last year, or maybe even earlier this summer still around, and they're still good, they're perfectly fine to use, those labels aren't going to show the new updates, right, so I'm talking about labels from newly purchased implants will have some of their label information updated. And if you ever, you can always look labels up online for the most updated label for the whatever product you have, if you have concerns. So anyway, guidance for industry 191 from the FDA came out, and it changed production phases, which we'll talk a little bit about in a second. It impacted backgrounding specifically, so it impacted finishing, but finishing and backgrounding pretty much for the ones impacted the most. And then we'll talk about how change of ownership or location doesn't affect this guidance. So it doesn't it doesn't improve the situation I'll say, and that there's no extra label use for implants. And in this all occurred starting July 1st of 2023. Okay, there used to be four production phases. Now there's five production phases. And so calves less than month of age and calves two months age and older. So this would be your suckling calf implants. If you if you use any of those in your calves. Okay, so this this third production phase has always existed, right? This is our calves that are on pasture yearlings, things like that. That hasn't changed those. Nothing's changed within those implants or those calves. This is a new phase growing beef steers in age or heifers in a dry lot with diet consisting of primarily harvested forage. So that's a brand new production phase. In that sense, there wasn't any implants signed for that phase. But there is now and we'll talk about that in just a second. This is where I was talking about it gets tricky. So production phase five is growing beef steers heifers in confinement for slaughter. That considers backgrounding and finishing. So where before there wasn't stipulations on this. Now that they're they're really lumped into one production phase. But what guidance 191 has done is not allowed re implantation within a production phase, unless it is stated on the label. There are some implants that are labeled to be can be re implanted. And so you need to check your label. However, there are some that are not. And where this is affected is if you implant in the backgrounding sector, and then depending on which one you use, and then you sell your calf, maybe even to your neighbor and they finish it, if they go and put an implant in, that's technically outside and not allowed. That would be off label use of implants, depending on which implant you're using. And it's off label because both the backgrounding and the finishing second sectors are not are considered one production phase. And that means you can only implant once in that production phase, unless the label states. And we'll talk about which ones do state for re implant. So again, if you've got calves or consume in dry hay, and you feed them a little grain or a little distillers grains or something, just kind of pale feeding supplementing, those calves are now in their own new production phase. And up till about two months ago, there wasn't an implant approved for that production phase, because it was a brand new production phase. Therefore, none of the manufacturing companies had needed a label prior to July 1st. For that. Now what we have is row grow, murk animal health row grow is approved for that phase. That's the only implant approved for that specific phase. So, okay, so grow yards. And I'm not going to go and read this thoroughly through here. Really, what I want to talk about is grow yards, a change in ration at a progressively high energy diet is not a change in production phase. So that's where FDA defined that a backgrounding diet, even if it's primarily forage is not different. And it is not a different production state phase than finishing. And then this bolded part, unless the implants are used or approved and labeled for youth as in re-implantation programs for growing steers, they cannot be used. So again, before July 1st, we could put a Revlar IS in during the backgrounding phase. We could come in and put a Cinevex SN behind that, and then we could follow up with a Cinevex plus or something like that. We could all do that while the cows are in the pens. That's all changed now. So I'll just throw one example in here. So we've got suckling calf phase, growing in background phase and feedlot cattle phase. And I'll throw up both Cinevex D in the suckling phase, then followed up with Cinevex choice, and then following that with Cinevex 1 feedlot. That would be prior to July 1st, perfectly fine. But now I'll talk about, okay, then another example would be nothing during the suckling phase, Revlar IS followed by Revlar XS. So Cinevex is the zoitis product, Revlar is Merck product. This one is still on label because Cinevex choice is labeled for re-implantation. This one is not allowed because, again, that growing in background phase is in the same production phase as the feedlot phase now. So Revlar IS is not approved to be in a re-implantation program. So in this case, producer would either have to switch products from the Revlar, Merck products over to the Cinevex, or not implant during the background phase to allow them to implant during the feedlot phase. Excuse me, the finishing portion. Okay, so change in ownership or location of the cattle does not define a change in production phase. So again, if you're back around them and then they move to another feedlot to be finished, that's still technically same production phase. It follows the calf wherever it goes. I already covered no extra label use for ear implants in that sense, right? So while we're talking about off-label use in that sense, veterinarians cannot provide off-label use of implants like they can with some other drugs. And so unless it specifically states right on the label that it's allowed for re-implantation, it cannot be used within the same production phase. So what we have is out of the 27 implants available currently, we have four that are approved for re-implantation. And that's Encore, Computo, Cinevex, or Cinevex, that's technically Cinevex one feedlot. So what you have to do is since we're talking background today, you have to start with Cinevex voice. Again, that's just logical anyway, because you're building up that concentration, right? Moving towards more aggressive. But then in the feedlot, then you move them up, right? Step them up onto a finisher. That would allow you then to use Cinevex plus and another Cinevex voice or Cinevex one feedlot. So that's an example of what you can do. Now on tour, the other companies, Merck and Alenko are working towards changing their labels. This just happens to be one that's already has a label change.