The Near Perfect Cow

Had to revise and extend my remarks on my earlier post.

What do the "muscle", "fat" and "milk" have in common?

They are extremes that require extra ordinary environment to be functional.

We need as many types as we have environments or we establish a controlled environment to make the single type functional as has happened with pork, poultry, and dairy. Will cattle of a single type ever be profitable?

And that is where the numbers guys and the realists differ - we had a long winded spiel given to us (as a touring group of Angus breeders - one fell asleep   about 11 years ago) about how the beef world was falling behind the Pork and Chicken industry and the numbers were the way forward - the speaker did not have the wit or the insight to realise that he was talking absolute twaddle - you cannot compare the management of a shed kept grain fed animal with a free range ad lib grass fed cattle beast and to formulate numbers to "identify" the "perfect" beef animal based on the pork and chicken example is not only deluded but downright lunacy - of which we now 11 years later have daily proof

just tossing up trial balloons Megan...for Robert to shoot down...  Could I hypothesize that those 4 are the true breeds...milk, muscle, fat, and marbling...and everything else is just a composite breed of the four...?   

You could .................................................   but daily evidence would suggest that the right kind of Angus is the true breed    how is that for throwing up balloons?????

pukerimu wrote:

You could .................................................   but daily evidence would suggest that the right kind of Angus is the true breed    how is that for throwing up balloons?????

that`s a water filled balloon. It`ll burst of it`s own weight   

advantage cattle wrote:

We all need to fall to our knees and pray for our Angus brothers in Australia. For some reason they will just not leave us alone on genetic defects. We love them like brothers but sometimes you say, “Just how many brothers can we afford?” It’s time for peace and tranquility in the Angus breed and the only thing we ask is to be left alone. I don’t know of any other way to put it. I know one thing for sure, no one can destroy the Angus breed from the outside, but if we keep having all this help we may be successful in destroying it from the interior.

Cheers,
Tom Burke

there`s a heck of a difference in destroying a breed and destroying a con game... neither hardly seems worthy of prayer; but when you`ve been in the miracle promising business for 50 years, I suppose it`s a natural...

Classic head in the sand attitude - seemingly the defects have been around for some time and DD especially would not have come to light except that an Australian herd, intensely line bred to both CA Future Direction and 036, had a number of extra limbed calves born - of course to start with it was expected that CA Future Direction would complete a trifecta of lethal genetic conditions - I am guessing that no one expected 036 to be the culprit in that equation. SSS has obviously been well employed by those in the know, but also research would suggest that the most common expression of DD is abortion so perhaps the scale of the problem was not evident to casual observers

Every one of the defect carriers was considered DIRTY in a pedigree, by most pedigree Nazis, before they were officially designated. Especially 036.

Kent - what did the pedigree purists (Nazi's?) know that the general population did not? I have to admit being offered CA Future Direction by a semen salesman about 10 years ago and after researching the tangled web which is his and 1680's pedigree thought "yuk". Sadly for the Australasian angus herd many did not have the same reservations - much testing in some quarters. 036 first appeared on our shores in the form of Leachman New Era - his milk figure was the attraction to many as milk was "the" trait then - we thought black Holstein's where we saw them and again were not tempted. Again this did not stop many and several strains of 036 - most of them carriers were adopted with gusto.

We now have some 036 three generations back but actually like the animals - good cow lines and distance can save the day (line is free of DD - hopefully testing is sound science   )

Would you care to elaborate on "dirty" for me please?

Winchester, Hi guy, Target, Mr. Angus. Nothing about them a purist would seek out. Trashy. 315 was pretty extreme. New trend looked like his nuts were different sizes and the trait seems to have been passed on in some current descendants. 036's pedigree was a mixture of nicely bred cows bred to the most extreme bulls of their generation. I had some Target. He was popular in Kansas. NO 036. Ever.

This of coarse from an Emulous guy who likes Dynamo. Pretty extreme himself and many Emulous came from Sunbeam on the bottom side, who were the founders of the last big defect feast. That is what tight/broke breeders had to work with and they used the tools available to get rid of the problems.

Warrant is a carrier of white Eye himself.

So far Big Sky is about the only extremely popular one of the era that has gotten through. Still not sought out by me. Mine didn't look like yours. The widest part of them was their hip bones.

I wanted to use 9J9 when we were starting out. He was always on backorder. Nature didn't want him to reproduce.

I used a couple straws of Precision. One good cow and one bad cow that died on a hot day resulted. Semen Always in short supply. Nature tried to keep him from reproducing.

I sold the rest of the Precision for a decent profit along with Bando 598, who's calves only grew hair and height on grass. Would gain 7 pounds per day if fed after falling apart on grass, but not what I was after. He had one nut. Nature tried to keep him from reproducing. The owner tried to talk me out of using him. But I was too smart to listen.

Nice to find out now that Premier Independence had to be shown with a towel over his head and two handlers because he was so hard to control. Sounds pretty trashy to me, and he brought forward another problem. Man shouldn't have allowed him to reproduce.

All we can do is go forward with what we have. In seven years, few will still be around to know the problems of the past or the great ones of today.

Thanks for that Kent - yes I agree with you about the philosophy of there being a message and a reason why animals do not provide good quality or adequate quantities of semen. I believe that the next undesirable and heritable trait to be DNA identified is likely to be corkscrew penis - grapevine talk here in NZ - probably old news there? - I have always wondered how much faulty equipment or unsuitable temperament has been covered up by artificial breeding. There are several breeders in NZ who would have 4 generations or more since one animal had successfully mounted and impregnated another without the wonders of A/I and ET - the resulting progeny are then sold into the real world where they are expected to do both on a regular basis for several years - no wonder so many commercial breeders shake their heads and wonder what the hell the stud breeders have been doing in the name of "genetic progress" over the last 10 - 15 years especially.

We have used an A/I sire a couple of years ago and intend to use him again this mating season but we have seen him, and his sire in the flesh, and had a maternal half brother here for a while too. We prefer to use paddock matings and real live bulls - an inducement is that the lambs all need docking about the same time that the cows need breeding so we prefer to let the bulls look after that part for us   

oh yeah, open AI was going to kill the bull market when it was first suggested and fought vehemently by the still same registered self interest; and cattle would just get soooooooooooooo good...and neither happened. AI just allows mistakes to be multiplied many times over faster...

Kent Powell wrote:

 

This of coarse from an Emulous guy who likes Dynamo.  Pretty extreme himself and many Emulous came from Sunbeam on the bottom side,  who were the founders of the last big defect feast.  That is what tight/broke breeders had to work with and they used the tools available to get rid of the problems.  

 

I thought sunbeam took the fall for dwarfism but not the originator. Unfortunateely all those records seem to be lost along with other records of challenges from that era. When will the chase for calving ease bite the breed in the butt will with small frail cattle?

What makes you think calving ease = small frail cattle?

I keep hearing about stacking calving ease causing calving problems. The numbers prove it false. Big BW = harder calving daughters with so few exceptions it isn't worth mentioning.


I think the problem causing small frail cattle is selecting small frail cattle. The number that works is being ignored and people who still select small frail bulls for calving ease. Buyers pick the most heifer fronted critter almost every time. In this case, for this purpose, use the numbers.

I have used a 67" 3000 pound bull that was as good as anything for calving ease (other than Jersey and Longhorn). They weren't frail, but they were too athletic to keep in. A big flight zone.

Are longhorns frail? Are Angus supposed to be big boned? Wasty? Saggy bellied? Leathery?

When the numbers are ignored and extremes avoided the BW tends to go toward +2 to+3.

Pat, I don't know who was the carrier and who was the fall guy.

It doesn't matter at this point.

PatB wrote:

Kent Powell wrote:

 

This of coarse from an Emulous guy who likes Dynamo.  Pretty extreme himself and many Emulous came from Sunbeam on the bottom side,  who were the founders of the last big defect feast.  That is what tight/broke breeders had to work with and they used the tools available to get rid of the problems.  

 

I thought sunbeam took the fall for dwarfism but not the originator.  Unfortunateely all those records seem to be lost along with other records of challenges from that era.  When will the chase for calving ease bite the breed in the butt will with small frail cattle?

PatB wrote:

Kent Powell wrote:

 

This of coarse from an Emulous guy who likes Dynamo.  Pretty extreme himself and many Emulous came from Sunbeam on the bottom side,  who were the founders of the last big defect feast.  That is what tight/broke breeders had to work with and they used the tools available to get rid of the problems.  

 

I thought sunbeam took the fall for dwarfism but not the originator.  Unfortunateely all those records seem to be lost along with other records of challenges from that era.  When will the chase for calving ease bite the breed in the butt will with small frail cattle?

Pat, you make calving ease sound like a defect. There are sorry cattle from any range of BW. If you need to know individuals that sired dwarfs I thought that the list of carriers was still around. Just select cattle with a big YH, YW, MW and MH and you will not be bothered by little cattle. But you will be bothered by other traits. There are always tradeoffs.

I believe that home raised, closed herd is the best way to achieve accomplishments. If you picked the right genotypic on the first selection.

Gather the outside genetics in the beginning. Then when you are satisfied with the base genetics, close the herd and select for functional traits. And nothing has popped us as a weakness so far? Or are there traits that need any improvement? How do you do that in a reasonable amount of time while maintaining the genetic base?

Most closed lines will crash and burn, won't they? Why?  Too small of a population, recessive traits become more prevalent, expectations do not occur, probably boredom on the part of the owner, owner does not live long enough, ...

The unexpected or the unseen will concentrate.  Isn't that the purpose of closed herd linebreeding? To expose the problems and get rid of them. What if the entire line is the problem?

Isn't that why there are so few success stories of closed herds besides poor management and unreasonable selection? I would say wrong management and wrong selection.  So, who qualifies to be the right person? I still think that in a lot of cases the unseen raises its head after a few generations and the owner decides that enough is enough. The unseen could be something simple like low performance that ended some of the historic Hereford lines. Like Pat said, who needs small frail cattle much less a whole linebred herd of them. Or who needs a whole herd of low fertility females? Or who needs a herd with cows with marginal to poor udders? Herds as you describe are uncommon. Which ones have left enough trail to make you confident that you can make it happen on that path?

Quote :

What do the "muscle", "fat" and "milk" have in common?

They are extremes that require extra ordinary environment to be functional

They can function but if you want reproduction on a regular basis you have to give up some of any one or buy a feed wagon. Isn't that the common weakness of any of these extreme types?

PatB wrote:

Kent Powell wrote:

 

This of coarse from an Emulous guy who likes Dynamo.  Pretty extreme himself and many Emulous came from Sunbeam on the bottom side,  who were the founders of the last big defect feast.  That is what tight/broke breeders had to work with and they used the tools available to get rid of the problems.  

 

I thought sunbeam took the fall for dwarfism but not the originator.  Unfortunateely all those records seem to be lost along with other records of challenges from that era.  When will the chase for calving ease bite the breed in the butt will with small frail cattle?

Pat, when you interview the board candidates this fall; you might see how many want to add registry standards beyond the old standbys of black and polled...and once again, I must correct your terminology...it`s now a registry, not a breed...

EddieM wrote:

I believe that home raised, closed herd is the best way to achieve accomplishments. If you picked the right genotypic on the first selection.

Quote :

What do the "muscle", "fat" and "milk" have in common?

They are extremes that require extra ordinary environment to be functional

They can function but if you want reproduction on a regular basis you have to give up some of any one or buy a feed wagon. Isn't that the common weakness of any of these extreme types?

Are these all not symptoms of single trait selections?  Whether they be by numbers or type - if only one aspect is concentrated on for any length of time, functionality and purpose in most other aspects will be lost - in my opinion?  Balance is as balance does ..... that's what I always say and yes I am somebodies Mama   (Forrest Gump just in case you missed it   )

Megan,
I believe a balancing act of many characteristics; but namely muscle, milk, growth, marbling along with function would be the most difficult task to repeat generation after generation without extra culling...a tru-line effort would concentrate more on pieces, that would then be crossed for final product...simply , the cow primarily for reproduction in a particular environment and one of ugly bulls ...muscle , marbling or a composite of both to meet the end product demand...
yet most registered breeders cling to "balance"...are we afraid to breed cattle that must be crossed to be most profitable ? one would lose bull sales, unless the breeder had all the pieces...have you ever considered a second breed?
you cross the sheep...so are they strictly commercial or do you produce your own breeding stock as well?

I'll start with the sheep first - they are easy - we breed our own replacement ewe lambs but all others are sold in the yards as store (require further fattening which we are unable to do due to weather, grass etc - living in the mountains with a shorter growing season than most has it's limitations) or the earliest black faced (terminal) lambs are fat enough to go direct to the processors - the last two years we have made the same or better money in the yards.

Due to the mixed nature of our ewes (Romney / Perendale) we bring in rams which we think are needed - the last couple of years we have bought Perendale although this year we bought some Romdale (which are a stabilised mix of the two). One year when the previous banker was being particularly noxious we retained some ram hoggets by a well bred Perendale ram - it seemed like a good idea at the time but we are paying for it now with our ewes becoming smaller - the climatic conditions here add to that also. Because the numbers involved, change both positive and negative can happen very quickly in a mob of sheep.

Right now onto the tricky part. Is not the point of any breeding programme continuous improvement? - we view improvement as actually maintaining the strengths of our cows while also being able to present a line of bulls very year which possess the same qualities as the previous years bulls, without interfering with temperament and structure. Few NZ farmers have a taste for Tru-lining in the true sense and although their cows are probably pretty related if they have been buying bulls from the same source for several years most would prefer to see their seed stock provider bring in some fresh blood - we see it as they expect us to do the leg work and research for them and they have faith that we will do our best not mess up our own herd so theirs is well protected. We are prepared to cull and bear the cost of doing so if we get it wrong - I believe objectivity to be one of the greatest gifts of any breeder and one that can be lost very quickly.

Something to bear in mind re straight bred or cross is that our buyers are not buying bulls to breed weaners to be feed lotted (there is one large commercial feed lot in NZ and as far as we know only one of our buyers, breeds to supply them - Japanese ownership and all beef exported to Japan). We are breeding the bulls which are the sisters to the cows we expect to climb to the top of the hills and flourish under our environment - seemingly the bulls are going on to breed the cows which do well in a variety of hill, and not so hill country environments, around NZ, and also non replacement heifers and steers which are either finished on their home property, sold as weaners to farmers with better country and more grass, or sold as 18 month steers with adequate frame for specialist finishers to make a margin on top of their purchase price. Very few of our buyers have other breeds although some may have Hereford / angus cows which is a popular and very functional cross in NZ.

There are two Angus breeders in NZ that have two breeds - interestingly both have Charolais and both have based most if not all of their breeding decisions on EBV's. We have enough work to do now to even consider thinking about other breeds, and generally NZ farmers prefer a simple system. The reason that the Angus cow is once again queen of the pop chart in NZ, is not only due to the demand and premium for Angus beef, but several consecutive droughts, poor returns and over worked farmers have resulting in the wholesale discarding of the cattle types that did not do. As I have alluded to in other posts the breeders who could quote "the highest this, best that, biggest another" as far as EBV's have done quite well however so have those breeders who have stuck to their knitting and kept on breeding what is referred to as the "traditional" NZ angus. The love affair with high maintenance "carcass" cattle masquerading as Angus is just about over as was the love affair with milk and growth beforehand.

I am not trying to tell anyone how to suck eggs or even how to breed cattle - this is what works for us and I am working on the assumption that all who visit the corner are happy with how they are doing their thing and love their cattle as much as we do.

I`m enjoying this discussion Megan and you just put up a week`s worth; thanks ...since I have an agenda ya know   more later, but right now improvement for me is avoiding stories like this...

Used 10 units resulting in 7 calves. One bull from a 2 year old a little too big, probably fairly hard to have and doa. One low performing bull cut at weaning. Two more bulls banded at yearling that were both a little too moderate and fairly terminal in their design. One of those also had a disposition issue. And one really good one that gained well, scanned well and looked the part with good depth, thickness and fleshing ability. Only two heifers both of which were pretty goofy at weaning time but both settled down enough to be manageable by yearling time. One was a stout, fancy heifer that was open after two rounds of A. I. and went down the road. The other heifer is long fronted and feminine with good depth and not much shape(Looks quite a bit like her mother) and will calve this fall.

to avoid such, I am concerned with far fewer traits, and if judging from your post correctly, so are you...a rule that guides me, well put by Gavin,
progress is slowed by the square root of the number of traits selected for...

An Angus x Holstein "beef cow" in Scotland pictured because she has twins off two different bulls supposedly.


Breed her to this for "efficient" beef production


Combining the muscle and milk characteristics - who needs fat or marbling? - or functionality? 

Combining the muscle and milk characteristics - who needs fat or marbling? - or functionality?   

That is a sad looking specimen.  I do not understand how anyone can get pleasure from farming animals that are not functional

Mike - I am sure that that story of reproduction "excellence" is repeated on a yearly basis in many quarters - the question should be "what is the point of that exercise?" from the result, a specific and researched breeding goal must not have been anywhere on the agenda?

Missed your interesting input on the topics below pukerimu and hence my tardy response.

Quote :

Good dogs are a must here too

I've no experience with Huntaway's and but a very brief encounter with NZ Heading Dogs via an expatriate shepherdess who has since returned to NZ. Her Celt was a good un as were her USA border collies. Curious if you've ever used Kelpies.    

Quote :

those hills pictured are too steep for horses - I use a horse on the rolling country but unless you stay on the tracks a horse would have trouble going on that hill (the back of the big hill is worse)

As I may have previously noted, your country is remarkably similar to my environs but yours is not nearly as steep nor broken as mine. Heavy timber, extensive brush and extensive and treacherous "blue glue" soils compounds the difficulty. You're quite right, such country is challenging to the run of the mill horse but certainly not those who've been born and raised to succeed in such a challenging situation. Same can be said for their cattle compatriots.

Quote :

hard enough on two legs actually and sometimes it is climbing grabbing onto grass as I go. The wind makes it especially hazardous -  four wheeler gets us to near where we want to be on the tracks and then we leg it for the rest.

Ah yes, the old slither on your belly, grabbing ahold of anything within reach, try not to get blown down the mountain nor cripple yourself while lurking in the back of your mind is the realization that rescue & medical resources are many hours away at best. Been there, done that over the decades. Admittedly becomes more challenging when you're a whisper away from 70.   

Quite the luxury to be able to use an ATV to get within so close proximity of your livestock. I'm decidedly envious!