The Near Perfect Cow

76 Bar - I would always prefer a good horse to an atv with time to ride them everywhere, and am envious of the sounds of yours.

Probably we are just to lazy or more likely trying to do too much in a day - a bike (4 wheeler) can get us to the back of the farm (via a gravel track and about 8 sets of deer gates - mostly closed   ) in 1/2 an hour - a horse takes about 2 hours, by the time the gates have been tackled, before we even start to do anything - also the dogs ride on the bike or in a trailer too. I am pretty brave but the back of the big hill and one or two others which are near vertical scare me enough walking them - as you say the thought of ending up in a heap at the bottom and having to be rescued can be daunting - prefer not to think about it to much while doing it. On a typical trip to the back of the farm two or more mobs of sheep would be moved, a side trip would be taken to check on the grass for the next moves for any number of sheep mobs, gates opened for cattle and perhaps some fence repairs or chasing fence shorts too.

We have not used kelpies as traditionally they can be hard headed and biters and are used more on cattle than sheep (NZ anyway - I am pretty sure that they are dual purpose in Australia but few properties in Aus would present them with the sheep mustering challenges and technicalities of NZ hill country). A good huntaway can stand and get a whole hill side of sheep moving with their bark and the heading dogs direct the flow. When moving cattle we tend to use a huntaway to make sure they take notice of the dogs and the heading dog to give them direction although she will heel if need be. Steady dogs (or at least any under good control) are a must on the hills with cattle as mishaps can happen in a blink. Kelpies and Blue Heelers (a derivative - cattle dogs in Aus) are more kept as pets here although Blue Heelers do not seem to be as popular as they once were - some issues with temperament I think.

I sure would like to see country such as yours and work some of those horse - some day huh?

so the hill country sheep get crossed but the {commercial} cattle usually don`t...here`s that university guy I like...

Three years ago I was invited to address BIF regarding heterosis and how we have either ignored or forgotten the value of systematic crossbreeding to improve profitability in beef cattle production systems. In the interim period since that presentation, I am even more convinced that this incredible genetic resource has been under utilized and devalued. At a time when all of our input costs have increased dramatically, and the value of cow efficiency is paramount, we continue to find arguments against using crossbreeding primarily centered on the concepts of consistency and marketability. Clearly, there are specific instances in the commercial cattle sector where heterosis has been used effectively used. I would argue, however, that the potential is far from realized. In fact, in the past few years, we seem to have drifted away from crossbreeding to more traditional straightbred programs that intend to focus on phenotypic consistency and end product, but not necessarily on profitability. Is there a rationale explanation for our unwillingness to take advantage of a proven technique to enhance economic return? In my previous paper I outlined the ―top ten‖ reasons that we have failed to capitalize on this important genetic attribute:

1) A cultural bias that clearly reflects “purebreds” are better! If for no other reason than they have a registration paper. Society, at many levels, rewards purity. Is your dog registered? Does your quarter horse gelding have papers? How far can you trace your ancestry? Please don’t misunderstand---there is certainly value associated with that record, particularly our ability to track performance and predict genetic potential of purebreds. But being purebred should not be a presumption of superiority.

but the commercial industry wants "fresh blood"...

human nature....a little crossing is good; crossbreeding is out; close breeding is incest   

I have read that piece and thought it was very sensible - then and now.  The angus/Hereford cow is a popular choice for NZ - they work very well for people. Some do buy an angus one year and a Hereford or terminal the other - the terminal (exotic crosses) are the cattle that have totally lost favour though, so we are seeing that less often.  Many farmers are in the same boat as us - no labour and many stock classes - keeping it simple is the key and if that means only having one breed of cattle then that is what they will do.  We try not to tell anyone how to do anything - only promote our cattle on what we believe their strengths are - if the buyers think we are right then they come back again and again and again - keeping it simple in the simplest context   .

Further to horse vs cow country ................ Our near perfect cows do traverse tough country and hillsides - however they do not have a rider who could off balance them and send them on their way.  In the six years we have had this property we have lost 3 in calf heifers over a cliff (before we worked out which gorges were just not safe - expensive misjudgement - only found them when mummified - hanging in branches about half way up the side) - why oh why is that bit of foliage (as in trees, shrubs, scrub) just out of reach more attractive than the grass under their feet?  Have had three young bulls with broken backs - over banks - one was still at foot, a broken shoulder (self mended but wonky - breeding), broken knee (fused joint, walked home gradually over 7 days and fattened) and broken hock (shot) on separate heifers over three years going over on the big hill and a cow with a broken back (all unsupervised, all during general paddock wandering/grazing - yes believe it or not!) - anyone wants to ride a horse over that country is welcome too - wouldn't recommend ex steeplechaser Chief though - his legs go in all directions at the best of times  

There is a resident mob of deer in the back of the big hill - 9/10 times going into the paddock you do not see them - it is a face of a steep hill (mountain) complete with shingle slides - don't have that many pictures of mustering that hill 'cos is not a walk in the park and more things to think about than whipping out the camera   have some from a deer spotting exercise that the boss and youngest went on though - Mike may decide to post or not   

Megan,
don`t sweat the small stuff , with hills like yours...



if the cattle or lamb business goes sour, you can always develop the farm into a golf course ...



you can hire a few of the striking Sherpa`s from Everest as caddies... 

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.

seems as if both could have a complimentary place ? maybe just breeders putting the kind they love in all the wrong places?

Megan,
You might get Greg Norman to take a look at the potential here...I see a par 4 with a dogleg right to the green from that natural landing area down below ...

I think I would even love the back of the big hill if the sun shone on it and you could stand on the edge for more than 3 days in a year without being blown off and the caddies were as well groomed and good looking as that golfer   

You raise a good point re the types and purposes for cattle - at the end of the day it is always buyer's choice. There has been a lot of time and effort spent on "educating" otherwise pretty savvy cattle farmers on the merits of using EBV's which is perfectly fine except that the bit about for all traits measured the highest heritability is calculated at being 50% or less has been left out completely. As with the race in the show ring, the only way to have the "best" EBV's has been to have the "highest/most/best" EBV's - luckily it would seem that many are starting to jump off the respective bandwagons and make their own judgements.

I called Greg Norman - he said sorry but his insurance company did not cover low level flying (riding a bike on the tracks) so he would have to pass at this point   

There has been a lot of time and effort spent on "educating" otherwise pretty savvy cattle farmers on the merits of using EBV's which is perfectly fine except that the bit about for all traits measured the highest heritability is calculated at being 50% or less has been left out completely. As with the race in the show ring, the only way to have the "best" EBV's has been to have the "highest/most/best" EBV's - luckily it would seem that many are starting to jump off the respective bandwagons and make their own judgments.


and epd stands for expected progeny difference , not expected profit difference...commercially at least...we`ve had one of the few university phd`s to make an effort to call attention to that difference...

Beef Sire Selection for Cattle Genetic Improvement Program
(Updated July 30, 2013)
Introduction
The overall goal of the beef operation should be to increase net income. Net income is a balance between how much is spent on the operation and how much income the operation generates. Therefore, beef producers need to focus on increasing income while minimizing additional cost or reduce cost while trying to maintain income. Although this practice pertains to the entire beef operation, this program is to assist in selecting a bull that helps achieve this goal.

When looking for a bull to purchase for your operation it is important to realize that as you make progress to improve one trait you often lose ground in another trait. For example, as we select for increased growth, which has a positive impact on income, we usually inadvertently increase the mature size and maintenance costs of our cows through retaining replacements. Finding the balance between the productivity level of the cow (growth and milk) and the required energy to maintain her is very difficult and, if not done properly, will likely result in decreased reproduction

Heifer Acceptable – This is a specialty-type bull that should be used when a high percentage of first-calf heifers are to be bred. For larger, heavier birth weight breeds it may be difficult to find a Heifer Acceptable bull. Typically, easy calving bulls do not express as much growth in their calves.

Terminal – This is a specialty-type bull that should be used when replacement females will not be retained. The purpose of this bull is to produce calves with exceptional feeder calf performance. Therefore, milk can be disregarded and growth should be emphasized.

Balanced Trait –Bulls that fit these recommendations should provide moderation for calving ease/birth weight, growth and milking ability. The purpose of this bull would be to produce calves that are acceptable feeder calves, while keeping the mature size and milk level of replacement females in moderation

Low Maintenance – This category is for producers that will be retaining and/or selling replacement females that they desire to have lower maintenance requirements. Typically, cows that have smaller mature size and less milking ability have lower maintenance requirements. The trade-off is that their siblings, which will be sold as feeder calves, will usually have less growth as well

Carcass Merit – Producers that will be retaining ownership of their calves and/or being paid for carcass merit should place additional emphasis on those traits. A Carcass Merit bull may easily fit one of the other categories, but would also produce calves with acceptable carcass characteristics. Traits of economic importance would be carcass weight, marbling (% intra-muscular fat) and lean to fat ratio (Yield Grade, % retail product or rib eye area/fat thickness). The pricing scheme that the calves will be sold under will determine the level of emphasis to be placed on each trait


so, a place for many, so long as the types are used in the proper place...a tru-line inspired breeding program would build prepotency and greater predictability for each type chosen by a breeder...I can`t see much difference in crossing types within a "breed/registry" and crossing breeds...except the one cross can continue to be "registered"...

Megan, a suggestion for Kevin`s  Father`s Day gift...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OM-FDXv2tFU

Heifer Acceptable – This is a specialty-type bull that should be used when a high percentage of first-calf heifers are to be bred. For larger, heavier birth weight breeds it may be difficult to find a Heifer Acceptable bull. Typically, easy calving bulls do not express as much growth in their calves.

And probably should be the most sensitive to environmental changes and challenges.  What, a total disregard for curvebenders?

Terminal – This is a specialty-type bull that should be used when replacement females will not be retained. The purpose of this bull is to produce calves with exceptional feeder calf performance. Therefore, milk can be disregarded and growth should be emphasized.

Why consider anything other than another breed?

Balanced Trait –Bulls that fit these recommendations should provide moderation for calving ease/birth weight, growth and milking ability. The purpose of this bull would be to produce calves that are acceptable feeder calves, while keeping the mature size and milk level of replacement females in moderation

Sounds too unexciting to interest most folks.

Low Maintenance – This category is for producers that will be retaining and/or selling replacement females that they desire to have lower maintenance requirements. Typically, cows that have smaller mature size and less milking ability have lower maintenance requirements. The trade-off is that their siblings, which will be sold as feeder calves, will usually have less growth as well

small cow man wrote:

We use MiG here, i.e., consume the top half, rotate. We have more land and grass than cows. Once we have the herd to a size that we are using all grass, we will start fencing the pastures into smaller and smaller parcels, for a higher density, faster rotation. I hope to use high density grazing within 5 years, and I anticipate our stocking rate per acre will be double what it is today, with no additional land investment.

A frustration is growing the cow herd. After culling opens, lates, problems, and developing a beef business, it seems you can grow the herd about 20% per year. Additionally, we keep the entire heifer crop, who will not calve for 2 years.

A solution is to buy cows, but it has turned out poorly. I have bought a group each year for the last five years, and the fallout rate is 50% plus, after 2 years.
These cattle are off all-forage management, but, are otherwise, farm cows. Here, they must thrive year round on grass(we fed hay 6 days this year with a thick crust on the snow).

Kxxxx is a proponent of epigenetics, and I now believe it "must" have a large influence in the genetic switches which program a calf for life in a particular environment/management model. What else could it be?, as the purchased cattle have excellent genetics on paper, but failed to a high degree. I am sure cattle purchased from a lower plane of nutrition, than where they are going, will be more successful. However the reverse is not true. Consequently, I am done, or close to it, purchasing cows.

Carcass Merit – Producers that will be retaining ownership of their calves and/or being paid for carcass merit should place additional emphasis on those traits. A Carcass Merit bull may easily fit one of the other categories, but would also produce calves with acceptable carcass characteristics. Traits of economic importance would be carcass weight, marbling (% intra-muscular fat) and lean to fat ratio (Yield Grade, % retail product or rib eye area/fat thickness). The pricing scheme that the calves will be sold under will determine the level of emphasis to be placed on each trait
[/color]

Quote :

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.

seems as if both could have a complimentary place ?

If they were able to breed true to EPDs.  But isn't that the problem in that the carcasses have not improved as a whole even with the strong emphasis.  

so, a place for many, so long as the types are used in the proper place...a tru-line inspired breeding program would build prepotency and greater predictability for each type chosen by a breeder...I can`t see much difference in crossing types within a "breed/registry" and crossing breeds...except the one cross can continue to be "registered"...[/quote]

Are the cattle true breeding types or cattle with similar EPD numbers in the source herds?  I think the latter.

MKeeney wrote:

Megan, a suggestion for Kevin`s  Father`s Day gift...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OM-FDXv2tFU

What give up the NZ institution that is a Swanndri ................. never - actually the swanni only comes out on cloudy days - usually in the winter it is three layers or warm clothes and then a layer of rain coat and leggings.  Over 2 metres of rain a year makes one of your favourite things in life your wet weather gear.

Eddie - great post - here is another poser for you - Australia is conducting bull testing - involving several cohorts, breeding cattle right through to breeding daughters progeny being analysed.  A Pinebank bull has had his eye muscle EBV triple after having less than 20 progeny going through to slaughter stage - now have the cattle changed? ................. no, are they the same as they were before the young stock were processed in Australia? ......................absolutely!! - likewise a change to the weight to scanning ration has improved many of cattle's our carcass figures - again have the cattle changed? ...........................no!  Are they more attractive under EBV's? ................. damn straight they are!  Do we care? .........................no!  Does it make a mockery of EBV's?................................. hard not to think so really!  A stroke of a key, a change of perception and everything (but the actual cattle) changes .......................... ridiculous much???  And yet these magical numbers have been the basis of many a breeding decision over the last 10 - 15 years.

Quote :

here`s that university guy I like…

What's not to like…third generation commercial cattleman (primarily running cattle on less than hospitable land owned and managed by even less than hospitable feds coupled with     http://www.csuchico.edu/ag/faculty-staff/college-faculty/daley-david.shtml

If they were able to breed true to EPDs.  But isn't that the problem in that the carcasses have not improved as a whole even with the strong emphasis.

Eddie,
I think Roy Wallace had a valid point when he said the industry wouldn`t use the top carcass bulls because they did not like their type...the form that comes with the function...need further proof than all the turned up noses at KC when a carcass bull gets pictured?   Everyone seems to want the traditional show type and it be marbled or muscled etc...sorry, it just doesn`t work that way...  

Kxxxx is a proponent of epigenetics, and I now believe it "must" have a large influence in the genetic switches which program a calf for life in a particular environment/management model. What else could it be?,

it`s learned behavior...this promotion of " environmental genetic adaptation" is way oversold; an overflow of the tradition registered marketing mantra...if there was anything to it Chesapeake Bay genes couldn`t work in Montana, Texas, or Kentucky...move the genes via the cows and there may be problems; move the genes through the offspring of bulls; no problem...if the production level is commensurate with the feed supply...more extreme example; Falloon NZ purebreds  in the Peace River area of Canada wading snow; next development location; Georgia pines...the cattle will be what they are both places; functional once they learn the ropes...

Quote :

I am sure cattle purchased from a lower plane of nutrition, than where they are going, will be more successful. However the reverse is not true.

I also disagree with the first part of this statement. Take cattle that have been used to marginal feed and give them more to generally get fatter cattle. Worse might be to get cattle that did not get enough feed to develop properly. Same question: does drought make better cattle or just cull out the ones with higher demands for feed to function or reproduce?

MKeeney wrote:

If they were able to breed true to EPDs.  But isn't that the problem in that the carcasses have not improved as a whole even with the strong emphasis.

Eddie,
I think Roy Wallace had a valid point when he said the industry wouldn`t use the top carcass bulls because they did not like their type...the form that comes with the function...need further proof than all the turned up noses at KC when a carcass bull gets pictured?   Everyone seems to want the traditional show type and it be marbled or muscled etc...sorry, it just doesn`t work that way...  

Kxxxx is a proponent of epigenetics, and I now believe it "must" have a large influence in the genetic switches which program a calf for life in a particular environment/management model. What else could it be?,

it`s learned behavior...this promotion of " environmental genetic adaptation" is way oversold; an overflow of the tradition registered marketing mantra...if there was anything to it Chesapeake Bay genes couldn`t work in Montana, Texas, or Kentucky...move the genes via the cows and there may be problems; move the genes through the offspring of bulls; no problem...if the production level is commensurate with the feed supply...more extreme example; Falloon NZ purebreds  in the Peace River area of Canada wading snow; next development location; Georgia pines...the cattle will be what they are both places; functional once they learn the ropes...

Take the chickens and pigs out of their controlled environment and see how they fare.

[/quote]

Take the chickens and pigs out of their controlled environment and see how they fare.[/quote]

I think I can guess - it wouldn't be pretty and you'd want a pretty big pit somewhere down wind

RobertMac wrote:

MKeeney wrote:

If they were able to breed true to EPDs.  But isn't that the problem in that the carcasses have not improved as a whole even with the strong emphasis.

Eddie,
I think Roy Wallace had a valid point when he said the industry wouldn`t use the top carcass bulls because they did not like their type...the form that comes with the function...need further proof than all the turned up noses at KC when a carcass bull gets pictured?   Everyone seems to want the traditional show type and it be marbled or muscled etc...sorry, it just doesn`t work that way...  

Kxxxx is a proponent of epigenetics, and I now believe it "must" have a large influence in the genetic switches which program a calf for life in a particular environment/management model. What else could it be?,

it`s learned behavior...this promotion of " environmental genetic adaptation" is way oversold; an overflow of the tradition registered marketing mantra...if there was anything to it Chesapeake Bay genes couldn`t work in Montana, Texas, or Kentucky...move the genes via the cows and there may be problems; move the genes through the offspring of bulls; no problem...if the production level is commensurate with the feed supply...more extreme example; Falloon NZ purebreds  in the Peace River area of Canada wading snow; next development location; Georgia pines...the cattle will be what they are both places; functional once they learn the ropes...

Take the chickens and pigs out of their controlled environment and see how they fare.

my cousins factory genes derived pigs are not only out of their environment; they are out of their pen and have their noses buried in cow piles...I don`t know if they are profitable; but they sure are pigs  

if a bull has bred in instinct to reproduce and be King of the Hill; he`ll learn to climb...



in one short WY summer...   

cattle heaven were the words used by the cattle owner...



Megan,
the word trail is often associated with the word  riding   



nope, it ain`t me, babe; riding Dixie ; I can`t even whistle Dixie 

Tell me who needs to go on vacation to the bottom of the world when you have country like that to look at on your own continent - not a fence or gate in sight - riding heaven - envious? Why yes I am! What is the altitude roughly? What would be the stocking rate per acre on country like that?

Nothing makes me crave bacon more than a pig eating dung!

Mike, you can't believe everything you read on the internet.   

MKeeney wrote:

my cousins factory genes derived pigs are not only out of their environment; they are out of their pen and have their noses buried in cow piles...I don`t know if they are profitable; but they sure are pigs  

We see that too - raising a mixture of Hutterite hog barn raised modern hybrid weaners along side our "heritage breed" crosses and fattened outdoors in grass pens with ad-lib grain based diet. Once those barn pigs get over a little sunburn they grow faster, are more efficient convertors, better yielding and most times a customer expresses a preference for the finished product it's usually off the modern hybrids. Certainly this is not like an animal that is living off grass alone and having to range in high hills. I wonder though how much of a parallel there is with the   "philosophy" that little, old fashioned types are the most efficient on grass and in the feedlot?
These barn raised hybrid weaners are definitely our most profitable hogs.

Are the "heritage" breed crosses stabilised or do they have an element of hybrid vigour too? Just curious. Thank you for sharing that information - always useful to have lots when making judgements.