A Report Card on Regeneration: Why One Montana Rancher Tested His Beef
When Bart Morris of Oxbow Cattle Company in Missoula, MT talks about grass-fed, grass-finished beef, he keeps it simple.
“That’s pretty much cut and dry,” he says.
But behind that simplicity is years of intentional grazing management, curiosity, and a recent decision that gave him something many regenerative producers don’t yet have: hard numbers to back up the claims.
From Curiosity to Commitment
Bart first considered nutrient density testing after Gabe Brown visited his ranch for a consultation. As they walked through pastures, Brown posed a question that stuck: What’s your omega-6 to omega-3 ratio?
“The more diversity you have, the lower that ratio should be,” Bart recalls.
The idea lingered. But so did the cost. Full nutrient density testing through Audacious cost Bart $5,000. For years, he couldn’t justify the return on investment.
“There’s always that little bit in you that wonders, what if it doesn’t come back that good?” he admits. “Sometimes ignorance is bliss.”
But he also wrestled with something bigger.
“You hear people say, ‘grass-fed, regenerative beef is healthier,’ but they don’t have numbers to back it up. I’ve always been careful not to talk that talk because I didn’t have the proof.”
Eventually, he decided it was time.
A Report Card for the Ranch
For Bart, the testing wasn’t about a marketing hype. It was about validation.
“It was a report card on what we’re doing,” he says. “Beef is our product. It’s everything. This put our money where our mouth is.”
The results confirmed what he hoped.
Conventional beef typically carries an omega-6 to omega-3 ratio of 8:1 to 10:1. Grass-fed beef often ranges from 2:1 to 2.5:1.
Bart’s beef came back at 1.5:1.
Even more striking: not only was the ratio lower, but the total quantity of omega-3s was significantly higher than another regenerative ranch that had tested through the same lab. In fact, his samples contained more than three times the omega-3 levels.
“So not only is our ratio better,” he explains, “but you’re actually getting more omega-3s in your diet. From a health standpoint, that’s a big deal.”
Management Matters
Bart tested ground beef from eight different home-raised animals, selecting a mix of ages and both steers and heifers. Each package of meat on his ranch is traceable by ear tag and carcass weight, so he knew exactly which animals were being evaluated.
Interestingly, age and sex didn’t create significant differences in nutrient results.
What did matter? Management.
“Healthy soils directly translate to healthier animals,” Bart says without hesitation. “A hundred percent.”
He believes diversity in pastures, careful grazing, and long-term stewardship all show up in the final product.
And while Montana beef carries a strong reputation, Bart is quick to clarify: “You can go from one ranch to the next in Montana and management can vary widely. I think it comes down to the individual and how they manage things, whether you’re in Japan or Montana.”
Confidence to Tell the Story
If there was one unexpected outcome of the testing, it wasn’t in the lab results. It was internal.
“It built me a lot of confidence,” Bart says. “Now I feel like I can start to talk that talk and say, ‘Here’s the evidence.’”
For regenerative producers, that confidence matters.
“You never really get a report card,” he explains. “You hear all these great things people are doing, and you’re doing them too. But after a while, you wonder — have I hit my ceiling? Is what I’m doing really making a difference?”
For Bart, the answer was yes. It is making a difference.
The Challenge: Translating Data
If there’s one frustration, it’s this: understanding and communicating the data.
“I paid a lot of money to get a bunch of information I don’t fully know how to use,” he says candidly.
The lab results were extensive — omega ratios, zinc levels, micronutrients, comparisons. But translating that into simple language for consumers has been the hardest part.
“It’s like going to the doctor and getting all your lab results, but no one explains what they mean.”
Bart is now working on visual graphs to help customers see how his beef compares across protein sources — beef, pork, chicken, even wild game.
For him, nutrient density isn’t just a statistic. It’s a storytelling tool.
“It’s like taking off your clothes,” he says. “Here. This is what we’re giving you.”
Why It Matters for Consumers
When asked why consumers should care about nutrient density, Bart doesn’t hesitate.
“They should care what they put in their mouth. It’s as simple as that.”
He references the idea that “you are what you eat eats.” In other words, the health of the soil affects the plants, which affect the livestock, which ultimately affects the person at the dinner table.
“Meat is one of the purest forms of nutrients you can get,” he says. “If you test it, you know exactly what you’re getting. And it’s clean.”
In a food system filled with ultra-processed products and ingredient lists consumers can barely pronounce, that simplicity matters.
Looking Ahead
Bart sees nutrient density testing as all three: storytelling, verification, and continuous improvement.
Will he test again?
“Yes,” he says. “It re-energized me to keep doing what I’m doing and keep pushing to do it better.”
And for ranchers who are curious but hesitant?
“I would do it,” he says. “If nothing else, it confirms things. It gives you confidence.”
In a marketplace full of claims, confidence backed by data may be one of the most powerful tools regenerative producers have.
If Bart could leave readers with one takeaway, it would be this:
“You can’t afford not to. For our health, for our families, I don’t think we can afford not to care about this anymore.”
Learn more:
https://www.oxbowcattleco.com/
oxbowcattleco@gmail.com
