Keeney Angus-Business as Usual Sale

In 1992, Simmental breeders met to discuss the state of the breed. The result of this conference encouraged breeders to quickly discard the big, hard-doing, low marbling spotted cattle in favor of multi-trait selection (type and EPDs) of black, polled bulls that were acceptable for calving ease and marbling as well as moderate in milk, growth and frame. This focus on usable cattle greatly increased the percent of females that stayed in the herd. The increase in Stayability is critical to profit and one of the primary reasons for their breed improvement.

92 words

df wrote:

In 1992, Simmental breeders met to discuss the state of the breed. The result of this conference encouraged breeders to quickly discard the big, hard-doing, low marbling spotted cattle in favor of multi-trait selection (type and EPDs) of black, polled bulls that were acceptable for calving ease and marbling as well as moderate in milk, growth and frame. This focus on usable cattle greatly increased the percent of females that stayed in the herd. The increase in Stayability is critical to profit and one of the primary reasons for their breed improvement.

92 words

Simmental breeders decided to make an average Angus their model; even black color.

13 words

MKeeney wrote:

df wrote:

In 1992, Simmental breeders met to discuss the state of the breed. The result of this conference encouraged breeders to quickly discard the big, hard-doing, low marbling spotted cattle in favor of multi-trait selection (type and EPDs) of black, polled bulls that were acceptable for calving ease and marbling as well as moderate in milk, growth and frame. This focus on usable cattle greatly increased the percent of females that stayed in the herd. The increase in Stayability is critical to profit and one of the primary reasons for their breed improvement.

92 words

Simmental breeders decided to make an average Angus their model; even black color.

13 words

So is the Angus genetic trend for profit going down to meet Simmental? Will profit be maximized at the level of the average Angus?

I only measure profit in my herd; quite frankly, my dear sir, I don`t give a damn about the "breed"...to use the word "breed" in reference to registered Angus or registered Simmental is too general to conclude anything...

MKeeney wrote:

I only measure profit in my herd; quite frankly, my dear sir, I don`t give a damn about the "breed"...to use the word "breed" in reference to registered Angus or registered Simmental is too general to conclude anything...

And that is why it is "nobody's" fault that cow numbers are down. It is why a multiple different breeding programs can survive, and some thrive, in similar regions of the country. One size does not fit all, although there are certainly some better than others. And why some producers can be quite successful without any data and others do well with data.

df wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

I only measure profit in my herd; quite frankly, my dear sir, I don`t give a damn about the "breed"...to use the word "breed" in reference to registered Angus or registered Simmental is too general to conclude anything...

And that is why it is "nobody's" fault that cow numbers are down. It is why a multiple different breeding programs can survive, and some thrive, in similar regions of the country. One size does not fit all, although there are certainly some better than others. And why some producers can be quite successful without any data and others do well with data.

exactly; so why spend too much money on bulls/genetics...or data collection...

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame,
But I know it's nobody's fault.

df wrote:

In 1992, Simmental breeders met to discuss the state of the breed. The result of this conference encouraged breeders to quickly discard the big, hard-doing, low marbling spotted cattle in favor of multi-trait selection (type and EPDs) of black, polled bulls that were acceptable for calving ease and marbling as well as moderate in milk, growth and frame. This focus on usable cattle greatly increased the percent of females that stayed in the herd. The increase in Stayability is critical to profit and one of the primary reasons for their breed improvement.

92 words

I thought it said that the focus on epds has resulted in improvement in epds. That's what I get from it anyway.

df wrote:

http://www.simmental.org/userimages/SM%20Profit.pdf

There used to be more than one terminal continental breed available in the us.

Mean Spirit wrote:

df wrote:

http://www.simmental.org/userimages/SM%20Profit.pdf

There used to be more than one terminal continental breed available in the us.

There still is

MKeeney wrote:

df wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

I only measure profit in my herd; quite frankly, my dear sir, I don`t give a damn about the "breed"...to use the word "breed" in reference to registered Angus or registered Simmental is too general to conclude anything...

And that is why it is "nobody's" fault that cow numbers are down. It is why a multiple different breeding programs can survive, and some thrive, in similar regions of the country. One size does not fit all, although there are certainly some better than others. And why some producers can be quite successful without any data and others do well with data.

exactly; so why spend too much money on bulls/genetics...or data collection...

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame,
But I know it's nobody's fault.

EPDs allow more accuracy in selection (or at least keep producers within a range).

EPDs allow producers to target a specific carcass end-point.

Indexes allow multiple trait selection with appropriate weightings of EPDs in that index.

Indexes reduce the single trait mentality.

There will be some increases in efficiency with time, although those increases can be quick using terminal bulls on maternal cows.

Most commercial producers can find bulls that work for them for less than $3,000. Often they pay much less than that. If they pay much more than that, they might want to consider AI.

df wrote:

Mean Spirit wrote:

df wrote:

http://www.simmental.org/userimages/SM%20Profit.pdf

There used to be more than one terminal continental breed available in the us.

There still is

My bad.... I forgot fleckvieh, but they are hard to find.

df wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

df wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

I only measure profit in my herd; quite frankly, my dear sir, I don`t give a damn about the "breed"...to use the word "breed" in reference to registered Angus or registered Simmental is too general to conclude anything...

And that is why it is "nobody's" fault that cow numbers are down. It is why a multiple different breeding programs can survive, and some thrive, in similar regions of the country. One size does not fit all, although there are certainly some better than others. And why some producers can be quite successful without any data and others do well with data.

exactly; so why spend too much money on bulls/genetics...or data collection...

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame,
But I know it's nobody's fault.

EPDs allow more accuracy in selection (or at least keep producers within a range).

EPDs allow producers to target a specific carcass end-point.

Indexes allow multiple trait selection with appropriate weightings of EPDs in that index.

Indexes reduce the single trait mentality.

There will be some increases in efficiency with time, although those increases can be quick using terminal bulls on maternal cows.

Most commercial producers can find bulls that work for them for less than $3,000. Often they pay much less than that. If they pay much more than that, they might want to consider AI.

all the above is correct for terminal production; though indexes are not necessary; just a new university contraption; btw, there is nothing wrong with single trait selection in some cattle...
maternally speaking how long now have I waited for you to tell us the correct epd`s to make the most profitable cow...3 years? the only thing you`ve produced so far is a constant harping about the lack of data, yet using the data available, you can`t make a recommendation...the show-me-select heifers have some epd recommendations, and they reflect typical university ignorance of real world production...

So what trait is appropriate to single trait select? I would contend there is NO single trait selection because as soon as acceptable is reached, other traits get some emphasis as well. Even Longhorn breeders select for more than calving ease/birthweight.

Your brief wait does not really compare to my request. You will continue to not send in the data, then complain there is no data. If you had sent in the data three years ago, you would probably have your EPD by now. Other breeds have an EPD to help them; why not Keeney Angus?

I bet some breeders would like to see how Keeney Angus will stack up against other bloodlines (for anything). Lots of breeders want to sell the "special" product; but it is important to be special. It is the breeders job to identify, then propagate genetics that add to the bottom line of commercial producers. That is more than one trait.

Quote :

So what trait is appropriate to single trait select?

1- fescue resistance
2- profit

Quote :

I would contend there is NO single trait selection because as soon as acceptable is reached, other traits get some emphasis as well.

That's good, you can make and sell more EPDs that way. Go down to "the beer and deer" and tell Bubba, "Hey Bubba, I done got too stout eating them pitzeras made of fresh frozen ingredients. Give me two 2 liter bottles of one of them diet colas." So, you'd go from pizza EPDs to diet cola EPDs.

Quote :

Even Longhorn breeders select for more than calving ease/birthweight.

Let me guess: horn length EPD and spots EPD? How many LH breeders do you hook and horn with?

Quote :

Your brief wait does not really compare to my request.

"What we have here is failure to communicate."

Quote :

You will continue to not send in the data, then complain there is no data. If you had sent in the data three years ago, you would probably have your EPD by now. Other breeds have an EPD to help them; why not Keeney Angus?

I ain't heared no grumblin'.

Quote :

I bet some breeders would like to see how Keeney Angus will stack up against other bloodlines (for anything). Lots of breeders want to sell the "special" product; but it is important to be special. It is the breeders job to identify, then propagate genetics that add to the bottom line of commercial producers. That is more than one trait.

Nah-h-h-h-h. I go by the guy's opinion, trustworthiness, skill and experience. If you see the cows, see the farm, know Mike, tell him what you need, he'll teach you the secret handshake and sell you a cow and/or matching bull: a set! As my daddy used to say, "Whatever he says you can put it in your pipe and smoke it." Mike is not trying to be special, he's trying to be real. That's the difference: you're trying, I said, ... trying, now boy I said trying ... (Foghorn Leghorn) to be an EXPERT!

How do you single trait select for profit?

df wrote:

So what trait is appropriate to single trait select? I would contend there is NO single trait selection because as soon as acceptable is reached, other traits get some emphasis as well..... That is more than one trait.

Just trying to keep this straight.... This is serial single trait selection into infinity... That's supposed to be a GOOD thing? I'm really confused.

df wrote:

How do you single trait select for profit?

you get paid a lot for the single trait you contribute with predictability to commercial beef production...an interesting and sometimes positive contribution of single trait selection is that correlated traits become quite predictable as well...

MKeeney wrote:

df wrote:

How do you single trait select for profit?

you get paid a lot for the single trait you contribute with predictability to commercial beef production...an interesting and sometimes positive contribution of single trait selection is that correlated traits become quite predictable as well...

And what is the single trait you can offer with predictability?

df wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

df wrote:

How do you single trait select for profit?

you get paid a lot for the single trait you contribute with predictability to commercial beef production...an interesting and sometimes positive contribution of single trait selection is that correlated traits become quite predictable as well...

And what is the single trait you can offer with predictability?

black color..

.I remember being about 8 years old the first time I asked my dad too many dumb questions...his reply then, and any time after that first time, was a strong indicator it was time to button up the questions...his standard reply was..."you`re running it into the ground" df, I guess you`re about 38, but you are running it into the ground...
maternal is not determined by a single trait...and the multiple of traits it is determined by, aren`t condusive to being measured by data since the cow is not the final product; all stuff already covered here, that you might have noticed and reflected on a bit had you not known everything there is to know already...but you are forgiven for it; I was really smart once too; but I was 28, and over it by 38, after getting some cows and making my livlihood with them...
if there was data or indexes to describe the best cow surely you would have given us the numbers by now...I`m growing impatient...

"It's when you consciously and purposely breed animals to change one defined physical trait dramatically from what nature intended that you can definitely end up with some major emotional and behavioral problems.
Moreover, when you're trying to change a physical trait you very, very often end up changing an emotional and behavioral trait, too. The body and the brain aren't two different things, controlled by two completely different set of genes. Many of the same chemicals that work in your heart and organs also work in your brain. So if you change a gene in order to change a chicken's breast size, you're also going to change whatever that gene might have been doing in the chicken's brain, assuming you're modifying a gene that is active in both places.

This is a very serious problem in the selective breeding of animals. Over the years I have learned that when you over-select for any trait at all, eventually you get neurological damage, and neurological damage almost always means emotional damage, or at least important emotional changes. The distressing thing is that with single-trait breeding for a physical trait, nobody notices the emotional changes that are emerging right along with the altered physical trait because nobody is expecting to see any emotional changes. The breeders are monitoring physical changes, not looking for emotional or behavioral changes. Breeders don't perceive how much the animals are changing emotionally until the behaviors have gotten so extreme that the alarm bells finally go off. Then they've got another big problem to fix."

This is a quote from Temple Grandin's book: Animals in Translation. This was posted on 4.9 barXYZ awhile back and I was tarred and feathered. I have called several times to visit with her about this statement but she hasn't been available. I received an e-mail reply from her though, saying she covers this more throughly in her book: Genetics and the Behavior of Domestic Animals".

For any of you who think you need EPD's, I've got one hell of a deal for you. Currently standing in my corral is a very well bred Three year old Angus Bull. He has 9 Pathfinders on his papers. He's a +57 on weaning, +100 on yearling, he's got good carcass numbers, ratios to make everyone happy. His disposition is excellent. Along with all this promotion you also will get a piss-poor breeder, an apparent dwarf producer, and if that isn't enough, the sucker will put more white on your calves than a lineback Hereford. First $5,000 gets him. Tell me what purpose all those numbers served?

This whole discussion of the value of different selection tools has been eye opening. While I have been discussing visual appraisal and moderation in traits selected through EPDs and Indexes, the responses have been less than stimulating. I can't give you the ideal numbers for a "maternal herd" although I would guess breed average or less for milk and growth is probably realistic for many producers. I would like to add some selection on reproductive traits and could to a certain extent with heifer preg EPD. However, any discussion on collecting data (would cost a couple hours of your time each year) has been met with comments that sound like "unrealistic expectations" of breeders.

I do have reservations about selecting cattle whose terminal progeny can't be fairly competitive in the feedlot and on the rail. I am not talking about any extremes, but certainly good enough to get the order buyers attention and repeat business. I think it is unrealistic to expect the terminal bull to bring all of the muscling and marbling in this equation. The cow will need to make some contribution if the progeny are going to exceed the average.

I don't have any problems with you linebreeding and would even encourage it. However, I am not quite as sold on it yet as compared to many posters on this board.

I do have to laugh when I saw the post on 1) slick hair and 2) profit. We all want profit and I am pretty confident that requires selection on multiple traits. So someone who is "single trait" selecting for profit with such dynamics as incurred in farming has sure hit a gold mine. My hat is off to him (or her )

There are some really good people in research, teaching and extension who desire nothing more than to make a positive contribution to the human race and animal husbandry. The best, I believe, take their experience obtained growing up on farms and ranches and combined it with the experience of life-long cattle producers. Then they apply the best science has to offer, to make the best recommendations to make life even better. Sure, some have stumbled but nobody is perfect. And they may not own cows (although some do) but they are invested in the cattle business because their success is related to the cattle producers success. They have spent 10s of thousands of dollars in their education and built their careers learning more so that they can make the best recommendations to producers so they in turn can make more money.

It reminds me of a book I read by a well known grazier. I don't remember the situation but my experience told me he was going to find problems because I have been in his shoes. Two years later I found out he changed his management because what he thought was true, wasn't. His problem had been addressed years before in my college courses as well as my first hand experience. So I paid for it twice! Once when I did it, then later in class. Slow learner, right? Anyway, I did not make that mistake again.

Mean Spirit, my comment on multiply trait selection deals with how producers determine the most important trait to them. When that is achieved, they move to another trait while maintaining the first trait. Some people think this is not possible because moving the level of the second trait will surely move the first. Yes there is a correlation of traits but that correlation is not one so it is possible to make these changes. It is not about moving one trait to an acceptable level, then moving a second trait while ignoring the first.

This kind of selection was difficult prior to EPDs but EPDs do make it easier to more accurately select on multiple traits. Phenotypic selection will greatly reduce the accuracy of that selection, especially for low heritable traits.

I think my dad thought if I was going to school I should consider being a lawyer. Go figure. So I guess I will make this my closing argument so you can get on to more productive discussions.

Mike, Just wanted to send well wishes in regards to your sale. May you and your satisfied customers have "enough"

Best Wishes,
Ben Loyning

df,
I have made the trial lawyer analogy relative to internet discussion several times; the reading audience is the jury; convincing , or changing the competing Lawyer`s opinion is insignificant, and will not happen...you present your evidence or logic to persuade the jury, not the opposing lawyer.
but the jury is not paid here, is not dumb, and can quit... likely from boredom in this particular "run it into the ground" dialogue. Near single trait selection examples would be selecting for extreme marbling {waygu}, horn length{some longhorn} milk{holstein}...as a correlated aside to that selection, has come other related characteristics ...waygu birthweight and slow growth, holstein consistent marbling, jersey outstanding marbling...the "type" however, of all three breeds, is very similiar...yet Angus breeders and population geneticist endeavor to add marbling and keep "beef" type...what a waste of time !
Since Marbling exist prepotently in a single trait breed like Waygu, it`s there to go get, to add at any time to hybrid terminal sire composites, and make now, what Angus{and other breeds as well} breeders using data and selection have been spending 20 years doing, and are likely another 30 away...from changing Angus into an Angus/Waygu cross...primarily to uphold the monetary value of "registered rarity" and grow that registered money tree at commercial breeders expense...anyway, I rest my case, for the benefits of having primarily single trait, highly predictable breeds in existence...the medicine is there to cure your ailment, but there always will be side effects...

Dylan`s 4.9 post is the only thing Ive read there worthy of Keeney`s Corner repeating...

It is also ludicrous to assume any of us know what some one else should be doing, when they should be calving, what weight calves they should be selling and so on. There is more then one system or formula for success. I obsess about genetics as much as anyone but I have come to the realization that in spite of the incredible variety in breeds in type and in quality, the industry as a whole churns along oblivious to my concerns. I just have to take a short drive around our local community and I can find 1800 lb Charolais cowherds, 1600 lb Limo herds, beefbooster composite herds, 1200 lb Red Angus cows, auction barn trader cow herds, etc, etc, and all these guys run and own anywhere from 250 to 750 cow herds and have been in business all my life and don't seem to be hurting. To me this demonstrates the reality that management will always trump genetics.

and as an addition to this being so, why blow your "management profits" on over-priced, over blown genetics?
remember the Fay Row promise...we take serving you seriously...remember that both take and serving have multiple meanings...