More than a decade ago, the CashCow project collected data from about 78,000 breeding cows on 72 properties across northern Australia. At the time, it was a wake-up call: the industry finally had clear, evidence-based benchmarks for the performance of northern breeding herds.
Those benchmarks didn't just describe the top performers. They showed what was commercially achievable for real herds, in real country, under real constraints. For many producers, CashCow became an honest yardstick for herd productivity.
The question that matters now is simpler than whether those benchmarks still hold. It's whether you can measure your own herd against them today.
Why CashCow still matters
CashCow tracked the indicators that define the productivity of a breeding herd. Four of them:
• Low mortality - keeping breeders alive and accounted for
• High rebreeding rates - getting lactating cows back in calf within four months of calving
• Low pregnancy-to-weaning loss - fewer confirmed-pregnant cows that don't wean a calf
• Kilograms weaned per cow - CashCow's key production measure
The third one surprises most people. It's easy to assume that once a cow is confirmed pregnant, a weaner is more or less locked in. Earlier research, cited in the CashCow report, found losses between pregnancy test and weaning of 5 to 10% in cow mobs and 15 to 20% in heifer mobs are not uncommon, and CashCow's own median for mature cows ran from 5% in Southern Forest country to 14% in Northern Forest country. That gap - a cow that was pregnant but didn't wean a calf - is separate from mortality. She's still in the herd. There's just no weaner to show for the pregnancy.
All four measures are backbone-level stuff for a northern breeding operation. And all four are measurable.
What good looked like
CashCow compared herds within four country types. It proposed the performance of the 75th percentile mob as the commercially achievable level, and the 25th percentile for calf loss. The figures below are the medians and the achievable levels.
Country type
Pregnant within four months of calving (median / achievable)
Calf loss, pregnancy test to weaning (median / achievable)
Weaner production, kg per cow retained (median / achievable)
| Country type | Pregnant within four months of calvingmedian / achievable | Calf loss, pregnancy test to weaningmedian / achievable | Weaner production, kg per cow retainedmedian / achievable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Southern Forest | 74% / 89% | 5% / 2% | 191 / 240 |
| Central Forest | 77% / 88% | 6% / 5% | 195 / 220 |
| Northern Downs | 68% / 81% | 7% / 5% | 163 / 183 |
| Northern Forest | 17% / 47% | 14% / 9% | 93 / 112 |
Southern Forest is productive woodland south of Rockhampton. Central Forest is the highly productive mixed country in and around the Brigalow Belt. Northern Downs is downs and open plains on heavy clay, and Northern Forest is generally low-productivity eucalypt forest across northern Australia. The first two columns are for mature cows. MLA notes these levels are a guide and may not be the most profitable system for every herd.
Can you measure your performance against them?
Most of the CashCow indicators can be worked out from records many producers already keep: mob-based records, an annual livestock schedule, and pregnancy diagnosis with foetal ageing.
Four questions are all it takes to benchmark your herd against CashCow right now:
1. How many of your confirmed-pregnant cows are missing altogether by weaning time?
2. How many lactating cows were back in calf within four months?
3. How many confirmed-pregnant cows failed to actually wean a calf?
4. How many kilograms of weaner did you produce for each cow retained?
If you can answer those four, you can compare your herd with the CashCow results for your country type, and see where the biggest gains might be hiding.
Your next season's profitability is already being shaped by the decisions you make today. It starts with knowing your numbers.