Reflections from LL ©

Farmerkuk wrote:

WOW that is extreme differences!!

Could we get some details about the cow on the left?

If my entire herd looked like that cow I would be set....

that is truly the impossible dream Jeremy; although I only gave up the same dream recently... she`s the cream; when I breed her to a cream bull like her; to make more cream, I get some cream and plenty of milk...I could only have all cream by culling away all the milk, everytime...not worth it; especially considering that milk still has the capability to recombine and make cream again...I`ve learned to like 2% milk ; no one should expect ice cream every meal

once I get to redundancy of individuals in my cows I may start to study them more
[/quote]


who the hell has patience ? who the hell has patience ?

jonken wrote:

once I get to redundancy of individuals in my cows I may start to study them more

who the hell has patience ? who the hell has patience ? [/quote]

and besides Jon, with redundancy, there wouldn`t be any "superior", top selling bulls to brag about...and less need for production sales, to get rid of the cull cows

GF and Hilly I agree regards photos of cattle, as for the 50 years, I hope to get back to you after the alloted time.

As regards the ancestral pen, such a record is good for those that have it and that are satisfied with what is in the pen, that is not the starting point for most though. plenty don't start in that position or they may be in that position and know that the pen needs improvement. Knowing that selective breeding is an unending process if the current selector is not the original pen builder chances are the same perceptual skills and or preferences won't be exercised and breeding forward the ancestral pen can and will only take one so far. Selection is ongoing even in a closed population and betraying the quality in the ancestral pen over time for lack of the eye of the ancestral pen builder is not an unlikely possibility. Maintaining and or building on the quality of the past is no less onerous over time than the original building process. The ancestral foundation will not ensure breeding success in perpetuity. Breeding is an unending process.

Larry Leonhardt says, "Going beyond my own individuals, to summarize my overall observations, I am very comfortable concluding that most female reproductive problems in the industry likely stem from sire selection of what are often described as "performance outliers"....and I have learned to visibly recognize subfertile types whether they are inbred, outcrossed, crossbred, male or female., for me this identification, recognition is the crux of the matter for the purpose of concentrating efficient function in the process of selective breeding to progress towards a prepotent line of maternal parent stock cattle.

Bootheels post was an effort to start a discussion that would clarify type, boundaries and recognition, in acknowledgement of the importance of the task. Hard to select and fix consistent type, to talk about or discuss this identification process without recognition and or the appropriate vocabulary to describe such.

My post was not a test but rather a visible point to start the discussion, no right or wrong, but an exersice in detailed differential observation that might assist in " learning to visibly recognize subfertile types whether they are inbred, outcrossed, crossbred, male or female.".

Visible preferences correlated with phenotypic fertility indicators.

Mike, your cow choice 120T, is one of my questions, like you my least favorite in type but so far just what the doc ordered in function so far. The slope of her rump though not visually appealing is a beneifit functionally. She has very good feet and an udder that will last. It use to be that I didn't really like her because she is a bit shallow in the heart girth and in her rib, more a tube shape than the wedge shape, and as Hilly says not the general type that have the more consistent proven longevity over time. Her neck is what bothers me most, a bit too masculune in appearance. Though in the photo below from last summer her neck looks more refined, still a touch of course hair on it though. It won't surprise me if she come open sooner than latter like her dam, unlike her grand dam and great grand dam. Or will her grand and great come through to help her longevity.


I certainly prefer this type of cow, 90T below, a paternal 1/2 sister. Her ancestral pen has more consistent longevity.



Is the 120T cow to much of a type outlier to warrant use of her bull calf on his 3/4 sib heifer calf below from the 90T cow?



The two calves sired by the 94U bull below, who is by the 61P bull that is Mike"s preference and out of the same cow family as 90T, in fact 94U and 90T both share the same maternal grand dam.




DB, more interested in discussion than answers.

None of your cows or bulls looked sub fertile to me and I agree this is the same discussion Joe was trying to start earlier on the postcard thread.

I also agree with Mike that we need more contrast if we are talking sub fertile vs fertile, I see this whole deal more of an individual preference past that.

I can only speak from my own experience how I started, once I figured out that the mainstream was not taking me toward my type I went looking for it lucky for me there were time savers out there that had the same preference. Took a group of around 30 cows that were into their early teens under my management and environment of similar type, bred them to a Walling bull for 4 years then bred those daughters to my Diamond D for 3 and then Shoshone for 2, I used some OCC and my own bulls on some heifers but that was the general trend of how I bred everything from that original group down.

Today I have a replacement pen of 66 heifers that are as close to my type as I have ever had with no sort on them other than one that broke her leg on a ramp in the liner and one that I lost to scours at about 2 weeks old.

good stuff, and has LL head scratching about how to organize a reply; I said to heck with it, and went golfing, proof of having the ultimate in cattle convenience genetics ...only to be rained out after a par and two bogeys...looking on the bright side, quit before I became confused and discouraged...the same traits that affect so many beginning cattle breeders...
in reference to that "other cow" I pictured, heck, she might be fertile as a Jersey, but her feed requirement type makes her terminal in my use...

Larry, if you are working on a reply, could/would you talk about how you identify a sub-fertile from a fertile female? Bonsma talks about short/long metacarpal bones, heavy brisket, the hair on the neck, the distance from eye to mandible. Is this what you use? Talk about applying these examples to young heifers. Is it possible to identify fertility in a group of, say 10 month old heifers? without being visually attracted to the "pretty" ones. Thanks.

Not adding to the intelligent debate any... but it's funny you mentioned the neck on the 120T cow. My picture pick of the cows at first glance was your second cow - until I looked at her neck. That neck didn't seem to fit on that cow and I could have believed it photoshopped in. Maybe that's not what she looks like in real life but in the picture she sure looks to have a slightly humped neck that doesn't fit with the rest of her.

Grassfarmer wrote:

Not adding to the intelligent debate any... but it's funny you mentioned the neck on the 120T cow. My picture pick of the cows at first glance was your second cow - until I looked at her neck. That neck didn't seem to fit on that cow and I could have believed it photoshopped in. Maybe that's not what she looks like in real life but in the picture she sure looks to have a slightly humped neck that doesn't fit with the rest of her.

GF, glad you noticed, she certainly is my most masculine cow. Her apparent crest is exaggerated by her winter coat. She is from the Thelma cow family which has proven over time to be my most prolific original Red Angus cow family. Here she is last summer looking less masculine.

[img][/img]

Hilly, I agree the examples may lack contrast from a fertility stand point, but to my eye display a divergence in type I would prefer to lessen. And so from the stand point of type fixation that as you say may be basically a matter of preference at this point would the bull calf from the 75S cow above be a better choice than the bull calf from the 120T cow, assuming fertility equality, or maybe turn them both out and let them decide. From the heifer side, barring drastic outliers, I am more prepared to let the chips fall where they may. On sire selection I tend to try and be more selective.

I am beginning to think that the tighter flanked bulls as a group are probably better breeders than the super deep flanked tanks that use to be my preference.

And yet 61P, who is Mikes prefernce, is is an absolute breeding fool and plenty deep flanked. This him just 2 years younger.


So who knows, bulls need to be selected though and hopefully differentiating and selecting based on function and type consistency with in the pool I have will still take me toward my goal of a linebred herd that is consistent and predictable in function and type.

DB

As much as it pains me to make a decision on some on else’s cattle with the information and pictures provided I would turn the 75S bull out.


But I don’t like the quality of my advice as I would have picked the first 15 year old cow, around here getting from 12-15 really starts to weed out cattle and although her hip doesn’t show the slope... week loins would have shown up by now, to me she is a solid cow for that age and would have fit in well here just from that picture, assuming the pens behind all the cows equal.

On the bull side I also would have picked a different bull in bull #4, I realize he is young and appears taller in the picture then I imagine he is. I can’t really explain why I like him ... I have never been much of a bull guy.

Dylan Biggs wrote:

So which cow or cows display the more desired type from a maternal efficiency stand point.
this coming 5 yr old
[img][/img]

or this coming 6 yr old

[img][/img]

or this coming 15 yr old

[img][/img]

or this coming 15 year old
[img][/img]

or this coming 5 year old



or this coming 8 yr old


These cows to me cover a wide range of type yet all of them may in fact attain the longevity of the old cows from a structural stand point. as they all have good feet and legs and good udders and to date have all stayed productive in a max 48 days breeding season.

Then the bulls.

How about this type


or



or



or



or


or


Are any of these bulls different enough to be classified as a different type?

DB, attempting to define for purposes of extraction.

I may be blind, ignorant, or just non-perceptive of the world around me; but I do not see much difference of type, of the cattle presented by Mr. Biggs. There may indeed be some more central to the ''theme''. Those getting out on the edges of the primary color, and mated to those on the likewise edge, may move them to another shade, of which we may or may not want. Dylan's less good cow may be one of those on the edge, or not. We can see it in the cow (that stands in front of us), but can we see it in the BULL?


That's all I've got, just to prove I'm not dead, and still care.

Bootheel

LL,

If you get a chance, can you discuss replacement female selection and bull selection? At what age would you feel is the most accurate to make the selection? Is there still some phenotypic variation in your herd? At what age do you feel you "know" a cow or bull?

DF

To further complicate things Dylan when you are seeking to identify the "preferred individual" by assessing phenotype how sure are you that they will transmit "the look" to the offspring? Like Bootheel said there was not a big variation in type evident in the cows shown so would it not be within the realms of possibility that even if these cows came from a closely related gene pool that cow #1 might breed a daughter that looks like cow #2 etc? Surely this level of apparent phenotypic variation would be well within the constraints of variation possible even from a tightly bred gene pool?

well, since Joe has only clean laundry to hang out these days, once again duty has fallen to me to hang up some dirty, since I`m sure everyone else
never soils their clothes...


ain`t she peachy? But pick her out at a year; I don`t think so...I think the characteristics shown are mostly after the fact of not re-breeding,
not real visible before...
seems to me here in this climate and my feed environment, yearling breed up is a test of fertilty...
two year old breed-up is "feed and genetic fit along with heat adaptation etc...
the open two`s moved to fall {above picture} almost always breed back,{the above did not breed back even dry for fall} and continue to do so at about a 95% clip...any missing there, leave; often fertility in my opinion...hate being factual when I know in land everything is perfect...my answer to perfection is, "guarantee me a rebreeding rate of 95% on spring calving daughters in ky and I might just buy your bull"

Mike, Peachy!

Sounds like you have some environmental challenges, sounds like the fall schedule would be the way to go, or what are the draw backs with that schedule?

DB

I was very pleased to hear Mikes customers appreciated his new no nonsense sale format where a strong demand for KA maternal genetics exceeded the supply.....where practical buyers report they were provided with more pertinent information to make sound buying decisions without EPD and registration papers than at any sale they had attended before with them.

Meanwhile here in the desert of WY I've finished planting beets ahead of the normal calendar date; always dreading the task of irrigating them for germination, always hoping for a good growing season without late spring freezing temps. We're getting about 15-20 calves a day now, spring is here despite that it snowed yesterday, our coming two year old bulls have been sold by private treaty, so taking some time this Easter weekend to enjoy resurrecting some interesting KC posts about pictures.....selecting types........outliers........ developing ancestral pens of look alikes........details.......and patience.

For instance, when Bootheel wrote:
Never fret the picture game......Simplicity of life, peace, enjoyment of life, serentity of cows being cows while being serviced by bulls being bulls; just simply fits me better. There is enough complication of life without my unneccessary addition to the complication of it.....

I laughed, thinking Joe, you are too young to abandon all the lofty ambitions in the traditional registered cattle business.....and I am too old to care much about all the complexities that the registered societies continue to pursue. Your post reminded me of Tom Lasater's wise words -"Cattle breeding is a relatively simple endeavor, the only difficult part is to keep it simple". Tom was a concientious man who developed a practical herd of Beefmasters during an era when the mainstream about destroyed the reproductive functionality of cattle with their pudgy square cattle. He professed that the breeder's name was all the pedigree needed......KA has earned that self-responsible right that goes hand in hand with his recent Declaration of Independence.

I do enjoy looking at digital pictures better than looking at numerical digits, a way of recapturing one precious moment lost in time. I marvel at the artistry of nature captured and preserved by DB's terrific picture galleries..... especially in awe at the intricate, genetic coloring patterns of those horned owls..... and pigs, and horses, and cattle, and natural scenes, combined with the diversity of extra-ordinary ordinary people....... thinking how Mother Nature must have an enormous sense of pride in all her wondrous works of art , everything designed each for a very special purpose, where absolutely nothing is wasted.......just glad I'm not a dung beetle who thrives on BS.



Taking pride in one's work can be different than self serving egotistical ambitions. What a boring world this would be without the beauty of color.....and without the colorful band of characters on KC. I laugh with DV's study of the mating habits of sand cranes, and antelope, and cattle, and how reproduction is all about sexuality. I once asked DV to draw me a picture of the sexiest, most maternally functional cow in the world, but he admits to having some difficulty fulfilling that request. .....the same sort of difficulty we seem to be having in deciding which type of cow to favor in our modern, stressful, competitive, complicated black and white numerical world of records and measures turning everything grey.....all because of man's pursuit of monetary values.

I've noticed DV is quite adept at drawing ugly weird cows, and cows who can jump thru hoops and over the mooooon, so for now I'll just have to be content re-showing a real life picture of one of the sexiest, most profitable and prolific beef cows in the entire world.......hummm, no public registration paper but she is distinctively white with black pigment, the only flaw I see is the calf's crooked tail....but perfectionists are very unhappy people.



DB says he "certainly prefers this type of cow, 90T below, a paternal 1/2 sister. Her ancestral pen has more consistent longevity." I certainly wouldn't expect 90T to be a top performance outlier, but WITH GREAT PRIDE, I think we could all simply live happily ever after with entire herds of cows like this?? I am dazzled by the maternal functional beauty of 90T's extended tail to the tip of her nose.....no, her flaws haven't been photoshopped away by incidental nit-picking perfectionists, they are in their real working clothes.



Hilly, who actually is a really very wise old man posing in a young man's body, in response to DB's series of cow and bull pictures wrote:

"......I can tell you which of those cows I would prefer just based on a picture and age if I had to choose for my farm but the useful of that information would be worth what you paid for it. To me the bulls are a byproduct when it comes to maternal efficiency, once I get to redundancy of individuals in my cows I may start to study them more. But again I have my favorite based on your pictures."
If we have a sense of pride in our work, and Bootheel never frets the picture games, why in the world did we ever allow ourselves to get so wrapped up in these mindless, competitive number games.....are the number games just another busy road to hell paved with good intentions, unlike Mike's road less traveled.....or are they just another marketing tool to attract the novice ? .

I enjoyed reading that W.T. had one of the greatest times in his life during his April Fools bull buying journey to IA, but was sorry to hear he wasn't successful in earning a sorting stick. While he and Eddie M were in the IA vicinity, since this is the peak of the sale season, I wondered if they by chance happened to stop by dependable genetics to look at the short-tailed Lot 1 (pictured below) in order to learn how to put some much needed bi-sexual Aberdeen back into their Angus. I suppose if I were a registered nit-picking perfectionist seeking the ultimate in all-purpose perfection, I'd critique her teats as being too close together, but for wider muzzled cattle with greater self-serving appetites, perhaps her calves could suck two teats at once to make the nursing effort worthwhile. However. I share DB's concerns about sexy reproductivity while trying to discern where to draw the line between dairy and "beefy" cows.......details.....details.....yes Joe, life is sure full of complicated details requiring the need for sorting sticks, T-posts and multiple numercial measures to satisfy the inexperienced "stockmen".




But what the heck does a forelorn farmer in WY know about gross looking fat IA cows buried in corn stover anyhow.....they must have a reason for being if only to serve as a bad example. Selecting types...I recently received a personal email inviting me to Dr. Pankratz's total dispersal of over 1000 head featuring the top outliers, 9 yearling bull and heifer calves pictured below with measures and sired by the latest and greatest popular high EPD bulls.....I can only imagine what the bottom outliers looked like out of the 1000's previously sold. To provide a little trivial background behind this complete dispersal, Dr. Pancratz, owner of Grand Lab (producing livestock vaccines), stopped by about 10 years ago driving his wife's luxurious Cadillac looking for cattle wanting to get started into the registered Angus business. I still registered my cattle back then and so after spending the day with him, he offered to buy about 100 cows from me at a very lucrative price.... but being a novice, his expert consultant told him my cattle's EPD were too low. Following his consultant's advice, thankfully destiny prevailed and I lost that tempting potential sale, my only consolation was that my cows wouldn't have enjoyed their short stressful life in Freeman, SD anyway.




To build the latest and greatest look alike ancestral pen to move onward, upward and forward, I'm considering selecting female Lot No. 1011 and the male Lot No. 1149 representing a nucleus of two of the highest high dollar reputation herds in the U.S, the Sitz Upward /Connealy Impression combination would surely put some phzazzy extension back into the IA "Aberdeen" Angus. Not to be confused with the TruLine concept, some days I wish DV would transform me from a plain black smokin raven who feeds on road kill into a wiser horny owl who preys on live vermin (expert consultants), but in any event, being a bird does provide me with an immunity from defamation of character lawsuits. That immunity allows me to say that these longer necks must've been a natural mutative result in order to lick their constantly itchy n' dirty uphill asses, however, I suspect nature will ultimately solve this problem by reducing the frequency of their reproductive capability. You just can't make stuff like this up.

Should anyone decide to build an ancestral pen of the most elite Angus in the business, the black hills gold of SD would be secondary to the black gold rush in ND. No, not the booming oil fields where workers are earning a $1000 a day with the prostitutes of Las Vegas converging in ND, I'm talking about the black gold on the pastures at St. Anthony where calves with 205 day weaning weights under 900# are considered runts. To provide KC readers with some important details to help them make better breeding decisions, they have a golden opportunity to select semen from over 27 trait leading Angus bulls in major studs like ABS, CRI, Select Sires, Accelerated Genetics or many more from SAV or the buyers of other SAV bulls who sold for $156,000, $147,500, $92,500, $67,500, $135,000, $75,000, $117,500, $265,000, $28,000, $80,000, $60,000, $180,000, $35,000, $275,000, $40,000, $95,000, $47,500, a $25,000 bull who sired the $265,000 bull, $30,000, $150,000, $87,500, $80,000 and $65,000 to average a paltry $101,521.80.

Moving on selecting types back in the peon world, MK wrote:

wow
for me, Dylan`s cow`s were too close in type for me to comment...I need simple and extreme examples ...



Farmerkuk wrote:
WOW that is extreme differences!!

Could we get some details about the cow on the left?

If my entire herd looked like that cow I would be set....

mk replied...
that is truly the impossible dream Jeremy; although I only gave up the same dream recently... she`s the cream; when I breed her to a cream bull like her; to make more cream, I get some cream and plenty of milk...I could only have all cream by culling away all the milk, everytime...not worth it; especially considering that milk still has the capability to recombine and make cream again...I`ve learned to like 2% milk ; no one should expect ice cream every meal

Hilly's post, :
once I get to redundancy of individuals in my cows I may start to study them more

in reply jonken wrote
who the hell has patience ? who the hell has patience ?

mk replied...
and besides Jon, with redundancy, there wouldn`t be any "superior", top selling bulls to brag about...and less need for production sales, to get rid of the cull cows


Well Mike, ice cream melts.and from my perspective, the cow on the left is not the cream nor an outlier, she simply represents the centerpiece of Shoshone homogenized rather than heterogenized milk. And yes, I am scratching my head trying to respond to all the thought provoking, practical comments so generously contributed by Hilly, Grassfarmer and Dylan.....and CC, IMHO Bonsma's observations are invaluable guides to observing what has already happened. I suppose I am a little more like Bootheel in that I am not a great nit-picker of incidental flaws.....which is what one would expect in the peon world.

It was very difficult for me to determine what type to establish without first hand experience, however, once a preferred type was finally determined, reflecting on the old adage that the apple doesn't fall too far from the (family) tree, I guess I could begin here with the patience needed to BUILD ANCESTRAL PENS of a preferred type. With major mainstream emphasis to change cattle from what they were to something better, ancestral pens of similar types are rare and therefore are not easily acquired, they need to be methodically developed in accordance with the principles of natural law. "WHO THE HELL HAS PATIENCE" and why the hell would anyone be stupid enough to want to depart from the monetary rewards of the traditional system?..... I suppose because most of us choose to eat beef over caviar.

It seems to be a no brainer to recognize that mixed populations of mixed types will produce mixed types .....and I fully understand not everyone will agree on what functional type to establish. So to answer Farmerkuk's request for details on the cow on the left above, I can provide them either pertinent simplicity or with in depth complexity. I sold her to Mike for nearly double the price of a plain ole common bred commercial cow worth about $1250. Some people might think Shoshone cattle have no family tree without public pedigree, but for whatever homogenized milk is worth to anyone, listed below is the maternal family tree of the cow on the left. Residing in KY now, she was one of the very first daughters of her sire (pictured below taken by MK).....a bull who was NOT selected for being an outlier, but rather for the preferred renewable qualities of his maternal ancestral pen......a "leftover" bull so to speak, born May 8, 2003, unpicked by bull buyers from among his yearling contemporaries, under circumstances similar to Mike's Unwanted bull...... his natural mature form just happened to be the way it is from maternal selection.....he was a closebred carcass quality cowmaker "boss" bull who could move like a jack rabbit and had the libido to go with it, but got careless one day as a six year old while in action and apparently got way laid by another upcoming bull who broke his right rear stifle joint......sh*t happens with cattle just being cattle doing their thing, just glad he wasn't a high priced purchased bull from SAV



REAPING WHAT WE SOW, THE DOMESTIC ANCESTORAL PEN OF THE COW ON THE LEFT ABOVE - #A426.
SHOSHONE GEORGINA'S PUREBRED FAMILY TREE
(Of 324 Georginas born from 1983 thru 2011 in this herd, 57 are currently active in this herd. They are not available to registered breeders with papers. Below is the 25 generation maternal family tree of A426)
A426 born 3/05/2006, paternal grandam 6374 born 3/25/96
A472 born 3/04/2002, paternal grandam A348 born 3/16/94
A421 born 3/24/2000, paternal grandam 6383 born 3/13/91 (dam of 6374)
A448 born 3/11/1998, paternal grandam 2065 born 3/20/88
A461 born 3/20/1993, paternal grandam 6357 born 5/29/88
A406 born 3/07/1991, paternal grandam 1702 born 2/16/80

K.A. CLARK GEORGINA FAMILY TREE (each named in traditional family fashion)
Gehenna of Craigie, born 8/22/83 - 10373917
Genie of Craigie, born 3/03/74 - 8058137
Genoa of Craigie, born 4/11/68 - 5982966
Georgina of Tetley 15 - born 1/03/64 - 4367582
Georgina of Tetley 3 born 2/6/58 - 2672663
Gladys of Balllylough born 2/2/51 - 1638690

FOREIGN GEORGINA FAMILY TREE
Glory of Tullyraw - AACAS 138540C
Galas of Tullyraw - AACAS 123119C
Gertie of Mullarack - AACAS 107932C
Girlie of Mullarack - AACAS 98961C
Galeen of Mullarack - 83210
Gaelic Girl - 79616
Gems Gaelic - 75000
Gloria B of Ballintomb - 59546
Gabrielle - 31231
Gem of Abergeldie - 27816
Gentian of Ballindalloch - 19258
Genista - 15051
Georgina 2 of Aberlour - 5979

So what does this cow family pedigree tree tell anyone about the ancestral pen without knowing the selection direction of the last dozen generations. EPD are a poor indicator of describing a functional type. The only one that can have personal intimate detailed knowledge about the cattle is the owner, anyone else is second guessing. The primary selection emphasis of this cow family from Gladys to Gehenna was BEEF QUALITY alongside practical maternal function, measured by the skilled eye of a packer order buyer whose life was spent observing cattle with both their hides on and off. I would be second guessing at whatever other characteristics that ancestry displayed, but what I know for absolute certainty is that not a single ancestor was sterile.

Prior to A406 born in 1991, lacking a skilled eye, I spent 10 years evaluating actual carcass characters of different types of cattle in my herd, both publicly and privately, data which strongly correlated to industry trends during a major change when registered industry fashions were maximizing early rapid growth and increased mature size....mature Angus bulls in the industry at that time ranged from 1300 to 3000 lbs....everyone suddenly began promoting ton plus bulls. About this same time, a friend and very successful performance breeder from Nebraska was winning the carcass events at the Denver Stock Show with his "cull heifers". I suppose the insinuation was to just imagine how much better their replacement heifers would be, but that would not be an accurate assumption. An interesting tidbit I read in one of the first Waigroup promotional ads touted winning the NZ carcass contests with their open "cull heifers". In all likelihood, the replacement heifers that bred up well would not have fared so well, believe it or not. The mature weight of my higher carcass quality bulls were around a ton, their sisters mature cow weight was about 1100-1300# depending on the time during the year when weighed. People in the know tell me dairy cattle have the most consistant predictable carcass, yet the dairy people select for milking ability. Hmmmmm.

DF asked:

LL, if you get a chance, can you discuss replacement female selection and bull selection? At what age would you feel is the most accurate to make the selection? Is there still some phenotypic variation in your herd? At what age do you feel you "know" a cow or bull?

I am more than happy to discuss my own replacement selection.... I cannot speak for others. I thought I had discussed my selection criteria somewhat extensively here on KC before. For my maternal purposes, the day a calf is born is the most important age to make initial selections which reveals the most important economic maternal traits for a cow/calf producer. The bulls are just the males of my preferred cows and beyond balanced functional soundness and their mannerisms, rightly or wrongly, that is about the scope of my bull selection. That may seem like "blue sky" but the bulls are usually dead or gone before I could ever really "know" any bull's true maternal breeding attributes. I finally really "know" a cow by the daughters she leaves in the herd at whatever age that would be. Regardless of what our occupation is, beginning with apprenticeship, the more experience we have, we instinctively get more proficient. So from my accumulated years of observations, after their day of birth if my yearling heifers were all lined up eating along a feedrack, I probably can do as well selecting my replacements by walking along the feedrack and selecting them by their heads as well as any other method.

Perhaps I need to reiterate that I am not focused on individual cows or bulls, I've moved to what is referred to as population genetics, a selection direction to stabilize a strain, finally learning to avoid the perceived outliers, preferring the centerpoint of the distributions.....my own personal selection objective is to consider the entire herd a"unit of one kind" Of course there is "still some phenotypic variation in the herd" due to many natural factors.....and my lifetime in the cattle breeding world is a very short period in time when most of that time was spent floundering. For example, LIKE NOW I HAVE A DETAIL PROBLEM. Mike informed me that the cow pictured on the left above was not #A426, that he had it identified as being cow #2979. Good grief, my cattle are getting to look so damn much alike, even I can't tell the difference anymore, it must be my eyes, it can't possibly be my age.
For the purpose of this post, it doesn't make much difference to me, but to straighten me out since they are now both Mike's cows, he went to all the trouble to go out and take a current picture of #A426. I don't know if he has a current picture of #2979 for a better comparison or not. I readily admit that some days my cows look better or worse to me than they do on other days.



Not being a nit-picking frustrated perfectionist, I still cannot see any SIGNIFICANT OR PERTINENT FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENCE between cows A426 and 2979.....one picture was taken when the sun was just right and the trees were all leafed out, the picture directly above was taken when the sun wasn't quite right for clarity and the trees don't have their full leaves yet. {mk note..426calf=1 week old} I don't know if one cow is more "homogenized" than the other or not, I do have about 30 new healthy calves on the ground, born without any trouble sired by A426's yearling bull . The only major difference I cannot see between "homogenized' and a "heterogenized" look alike cows is that one would be more renewable than the other, which the industry refers to as prepotency.

I quit DNA testing several years ago since several sires could qualify as the sire of a calf, reasoning that if the DNA was similar, what the hell difference does it make who is who since my selection for a specific functional type remains constant. I've referred to it as "breeding a breed within a breed", performance breeders might refer to it as being stagnant, others might refer to it as linebreeding but they are misinformed.....I am simply stabilizing a preferred type to reduce rather than increase problems. Any actual IBC's are likely self-governed by selection and are not worth trying to calculate based on averages. To demonstrate the purebred pedigree of cow #2979 for DF and Farmekuk, it is as follows:

SHOSHONE LUCY PUREBRED MATERNAL FAMILY TREE
(Of 346 Lucys born in this herd from the base cow since 1978, there are 64 Lucys currently in the herd)
2979 born 2/20/2007 pat grandam MS (one of several of the same type paternal grandams)
2966 born 5/15/2000 pat grandam 712
2931 born 4/10/1998 pat grandam 6345
2900 born 4/06/1995 pat grandam 1702
2944 born 2/02/1988 pat grandam 1702
2937 born 4/02/1986 pat grandam 2712
2910 born 4/13/1981 pat grandam 2003
2901 born 3/15/1978 pat grandam 6001
GDA29 born 2/8/1976 pat grandam Candida of Wye
DA29 born 3/21/1973 pat grandam Cerelia of Wye
A29 born 4/6/1970 pat grandam Battista of Wye
29 born 5/6/1968 pat grandam Moles Hill Enzora
----------------------------------------------------
Haystack Lucy 30 born 9/28/64
Bandolier of Arkdale 5 born 4/9/62
Arkdale Bandolier 30 born 3/5/57
Bandoliers Ella 5 born 2/20/46 (note her dam would've been 16 yrs old, there is more than ample evidence that "sprinters" lack longevity)Ellas Sixth Lassie born 3/25/30
Ella of Ash Roe born 1/5/1922

It would be interesting to me if I could use the TruLine color wheel rather than numbers to describe "functional purity" by visualizing the gradual shades of color changes over time due to selection of each individual generation.. To fixate certain characters in a population, in general it is estimated to require up to 8 generations of close breeding depending on several factors. Cows 2944 thru 2979 would be a distinctive yellow. Certainly knowing the qualities of the ancestry is essential to the breeder, but it is a waste of time by going back to 1922 except perhaps for nostalgic reasons or in looking back to discern long term trends....none of which can be changed.

For further discussion's sake, from 1965 through 1980 there was a significant difference among the Angus cattle in my herd, I could recognize who was who with or without identification tags the same as we can recognize people by their faces. While the mainstream uses outliers to change cattle selecting for progeny differences, I am trying to make them more alike selecting for progeny similarities. Today in this herd, there is no significant difference in cow families like there once was. In my closed population, I maintain their family identification only for my own logistical purposes. My constant selection becomes the preferred type that ultimately prevails anyway and becomes the only Shoshone pedigree needed for outside usuage. I simply do not know which cattle's random half of the genotype is superior to others based on phenotype.

And for further discussion about variation, I have often wondered if anyone really cares about doing a thorough psychoanalysis of the ultrasound distributions of a sire, a herd, a breed or composites for prepotency. I do pay alot of attention to distributions. I have developed a fat phobia over time observing the side effects. For example, Mike told me cow #426 got relatively fat before she calved this spring, yet I remembered her more as being what I call a beef jersey type. And Hilly posted a picture of his Shoshone cow a month or two ago, who didn't work last summer raising a calf and she looked fat to me. My cows do get fat when they don't work, and I suppose that could be one way DB could define the difference between a dairy cow and a beef cow. I do believe the $EN numbers offer some reasonable estimated guidelines.

It would be nice if we could instill appetite governors on our cattle, but it is impractical, all we can do practically is control the amount of feedstuffs they eat. I have yet to see any cows get fat on poor feed and water. We all know fat is accumulated by environmental factors, where that fat is stored in the body is determined by genetics. I prefer the genetics that store fat intramuscularly and in the milk. To add another trivial detail for whatever its worth, .a grandaughter of #A29, cow #ECA29 born in 1974 produced a bull born in 1978 that became one of the highest marbling bulls in the breed at that point in time, used successfully to freshen Holstein cows to improve the beef value of the resultant progeny. I have learned to identify some external phenotypic characteristics as indicators of carcass quality. I suspect that I have had several bulls who have been superior to that 1978 bull, they just weren't evaluated as individuals..

I dislike cattle with "blue" milk and with patchy fat that was so prevalent in Shorthorns and mellow yellow Herefords at one point in time.....and pudgy Angus.....and bulky exotic oxen.......and cattle with too much milk are inefficient convertors of feedstuffs to beef. So, we are left pick our plums or poison.....to pick stayers or sprinters....to maximize or reduce variation......but whatever we choose, I remain convinced that averages without distribution ranges are a cowman's nightmare and that the registered breed societies as a whole remain in a chaotic state of disarray......and that without a shadow of a doubt they prefer it to remain that way.....and it will as long as they are financially supported by the populace.

I guess I chose to stick with an Angus derivative base since despite man's intent on changing them for the last 60 years, they have somehow prevailed with their inherent distributions. I think I've said more than enough to stimulate some discussion on replacement female and bull selection.....whew, trying to simplify the complex gets very complicated, perhaps we should just do what Bootheel and Bob H do, to enjoy life just put the bulls with the cows and let nature take its course.......but we won't.

LL in the vicinity of enjoying chocolate Easter bunnies, Russell Stover marshmallow eggs and yellow, pink and orange sugar coated peeps to help sustain $80.00 per ton sugarbeets

well Larry,
you might not be seeing cows or tree leaves the best, but you sure "see" the registered business beyond clear ...I told a former customer {former; because even though he is a commercial producer, he needs registration papers to trace lineages} that pedigrees have served to make bigger fools of people than they have to make better cattle; I know, for I once was one of them... having the pedigree on a-426 is completely meaningless to me for I am not familiar with one single individual ancestor; except your prefix in the pedigree tells me she is a product of a program of consistent direction; but I only know that, because I know you...thank scientist for epds, which tell something about individuality, but are still grossly inadequate to describe a cow...what we need DF, along with electronic ID tags, is a device implanted in the rumen measuring intake everyday, both quantity and quality, and then an index ...but as I found out years ago, that any rule can be gotten around; any new "measurement or index" can be exploited by the con game marketers...leaving me no better method for genetic selection and purchase outside the herd than finding someone with a breeding program of consistent renewal...those that AI to bulls from all over, may have programs, but I can`t discern any objective beyond staying popular...a good objective I suppose; because popular has always brought more money than good...
being unpopular is just like being unpapered; it cost you money if you don`t play the illusion game; it cost more to attempt to change the illusion game...with the most recent addition of Bill Nelson to our vision, I`ve finally used up the fingers on one hand counting those on the road least traveled...but that`s four more than there was 5 years ago with any kind of futuristic Tru-line vision, though first, before we can advance, we must learn our ABC`s... ...it`s the toughest first grade curriculum in America; I`m hoping to graduate soon, having only repeated first grade 5 years; after spending nearly 25 years not even learning to color in the kindergarten book you supplied for free ... you gotta learn to color, to get out of kindergarten...

Larry, A selection question for you. I agree that the best selection for maternal cattle is based on their mother the day they are born. But what if the day they are born mother nature does not want them? I had a close bred calf born yesterday that without my help would not have got up and sucked. This calf's sire and dam are both of the type I want to perpetuate here. Based on his dam alone he would be a herd bull candidate. Do we experiment with that which mother nature would not allow? Or should it automatically go to beef? It will be interesting evaluating this nubbin on through the year. On another note I think I probably got more nubbins going from outcross to outcross then I have from closer breeding so far.

Ben Loyning, In the vicinity of being young and dumb, and loving the learning process.

Quote :

Perhaps I need to reiterate that I am not focused on individual cows or bulls, I've moved to what is referred to as population genetics, a selection direction to stabilize a strain, finally learning to avoid the perceived outliers, preferring the centerpoint of the distributions.....my own personal selection objective is to consider the entire herd a"unit of one kind"

This perhaps to me is the greatest insight I have currently gained from studying the Tru-Line concept as presented in this and the preceding Reflections from LL threads. When at Mike's sale last Saturday, after the losing the first two bulls from Mike's "yellow" maternal 6309 line, my son leaned over and asked what we were going to do next, I told him we would just buy from that same "6309" maternal family whatever bulls that were left and that neither he nor I had the ability to determine at that point which bull would be best. What we did know is that any of those bulls had the genetics to produce 6309 cows like we looked at in the pastures on Friday afternoon.

It is such a relief not having to pick the "best" but to pick from the families that will produce the most alike according to the "type" of that family. If my whole herd of momma cows look like the average of those 6309 cows then we will have bought well.

Here is what Mike said about Pen 1:

Quote :

Pen 1…Model A cowmaker bulls mostly sired by Shoshone Fenley 6309…
The daughters of Fenley will be 1200-1300 lb cows mature with body capacity, gentle temperament, slick hair and our most consistent udder quality ever. We have used Fenley on heifers with a minimum of trouble or birth weight and expect these sons, though certainly not Longhorns, to be similar in use. Breed to heifers that will be observed at calving.

After losing the first two I bought the next 3 and never looked back. I based that decision on Mike's descriptions backed on reviewing his cattle in the pastures. It relieves me of making genotype decisions based on phenotype observations.

Bill

AlaBill wrote:

Quote :

Perhaps I need to reiterate that I am not focused on individual cows or bulls, I've moved to what is referred to as population genetics, a selection direction to stabilize a strain, finally learning to avoid the perceived outliers, preferring the centerpoint of the distributions.....my own personal selection objective is to consider the entire herd a"unit of one kind"

This perhaps to me is the greatest insight I have currently gained from studying the Tru-Line concept as presented in this and the preceding Reflections from LL threads. When at Mike's sale last Saturday, after the losing the first two bulls from Mike's "yellow" maternal 6309 line, my son leaned over and asked what we were going to do next, I told him we would just buy from that same "6309" maternal family whatever bulls that were left and that neither he nor I had the ability to determine at that point which bull would be best. What we did know is that any of those bulls had the genetics to produce 6309 cows like we looked at in the pastures on Friday afternoon.

It is such a relief not having to pick the "best" but to pick from the families that will produce the most alike according to the "type" of that family. If my whole herd of momma cows look like the average of those 6309 cows then we will have bought well.

Here is what Mike said about Pen 1:

Quote :

Pen 1…Model A cowmaker bulls mostly sired by Shoshone Fenley 6309…
The daughters of Fenley will be 1200-1300 lb cows mature with body capacity, gentle temperament, slick hair and our most consistent udder quality ever. We have used Fenley on heifers with a minimum of trouble or birth weight and expect these sons, though certainly not Longhorns, to be similar in use. Breed to heifers that will be observed at calving.

After losing the first two I bought the next 3 and never looked back. I based that decision on Mike's descriptions backed on reviewing his cattle in the pastures. It relieves me of making genotype decisions based on phenotype observations.

Bill

Bill,
Thats one of the things I like most about the TruLine concept. I hate looking back through pedigrees that are useless to me. While I read Larry's above post pretty closely, I found myself scrolling when I got to the pedigrees, and I feel pretty guilty about it because he took the time to post it. But really it is kind of meaningless and I feel that adds to the argument that pedigrees on paper are unnecessary. The breeders intentions and methods used to guarantee consistency for the intended purpose...imo...that's what really matters.

Chris,
Science and economics are on our side; human nature isn`t, and human nature is the one thing that never changes, so tradition prevails....the biggest obstacle to anything new is fear; there`s security in that AAA , AHA, whatever group verification ; a security that only exists from tradition, not science or commercial production economics...it only takes ONE to make a new road; to go where no one has gone before; and the man who goes alone can start today; the one who needs company must wait until another is ready...I salute LL for going alone where no one has gone before; if Tru-line "truly" makes sense to another, the proof is only in following suit...talk is cheap and criticism easy; you can`t swim far in new waters while anchored to the shore...no big deal; the smaller the boat; the harder we row; and the faster we go

.


Shades by quantity of black/white, beef/dairy, employed/unemployed, summer/winter....

This cow with a calf in the summer






Same cow unemployed for a year, in the winter a year and 3 months later






Her brother with cows in the fall of the year at the end breeding two groups of cows that year.






Same bull unemployed for 6 months, surviving winter, in the spring of the next year

Ben Loyning wrote:

Larry, A selection question for you. I agree that the best selection for maternal cattle is based on their mother the day they are born. But what if the day they are born mother nature does not want them? I had a close bred calf born yesterday that without my help would not have got up and sucked. This calf's sire and dam are both of the type I want to perpetuate here. Based on his dam alone he would be a herd bull candidate. Do we experiment with that which mother nature would not allow? Or should it automatically go to beef? It will be interesting evaluating this nubbin on through the year. On another note I think I probably got more nubbins going from outcross to outcross then I have from closer breeding so far.

Ben Loyning, In the vicinity of being young and dumb, and loving the learning process.

Ben, I have no idea what the heritability of that particular weakness might be. When man domesticated livestock, he assumed control of their care. How much care we are willing to provide our livestock is usually driven by some economic incentive.
Since all life has weaknesses, it becomes an individual decision of which ones we might tolerate. Over the long term I have paid dearly for propagating known weaknesses for short term gains. However, I know a man that lives about 30 miles northwest of you that has a herd of primarily Simme cross cows, who willingly and routinely helps most of his calves nurse for up to a week since he likes selling 700 lb. plus commercial calves. While I've watched the mainstream continually compound problems in their haste to increase economics, remember I have said my objective is to reduce problems.....and ideally, the TruLine concept could do a much better job of managing commercial problems.... needless to say it is not a quick 'n easy task on the part of the seedstock breeder.

LL in the vicinity of uncomfortable howling winds sweeping the area clean while dumping all the old dried weeds and trash into our irrigation ditches, could've expected it following an unusual 82 degree day yesterday.

We started marking calves we doctor in the calving book and cut them when it is an individual problem. (Last spring we had a week of overcast, misty, cool weather sandwiched between hot, dry and dusty. Lots of calves needed doctored. I don't hold that against them. ) Same with help calving, nursing, etc. When we band/cull bulls in the chute at weaning, we don't know the reason at the chute (mother' s udder, disposition, inability to figure out rotating pastures or being medicated), we just have cut or potential keep marked on each calf. If they do something wrong in the chute, I cut them. I try to talk myself out of it on a few because some "Top" calves get banded.