CAMILLA CHANCE 37T

[DL]

Good evening all - looking for semen on this ancient Angus bull (1962 model) CAMILLA CHANCE 37T  5475692 for research purposes - if you have some you are willing to part with or can give me a lead please contact me - research never stops - always need samples - thanks in advance

 

[knabe]

i already took care of it.  unless expediency is required.  it didn't seem it was.

 

[DL]

i already took care of it.  unless expediency is required.  it didn't seem it was.

looking for semen on this ancient Angus bull (1962 model) CAMILLA CHANCE 37T  5475692 for research purposes - if you have some you are willing to part with or can give me a lead please contact me - research never stops - always need samples - thanks in advance - LOOKING FOR IT SOONER THAN LATER - can you help with that?? Over the past almost 10 years the "laters" often never pan out - a lot like the samples that never get collected and sent

 

[LLBUX]

Good old 'Canadian Colossal', the biggest Angus bull of his day. 
I believe he weighed 2500 pounds at his peak.

What are you looking for in the tests?

 

[knabe]

What are you looking for in the tests?

what angus used to be.

to see if he has any defects or is a carrier for an unknown defect, help define the history of defects and their entrance into the breed, mutation rates, define families, lots of reasons.  there really are relatively few real angus samples, especially one's that go to earl marshall so quickly.  the breed isn't really angus, in my opinion, any more, especially after two, if not six severe genetic bottlenecks, first the puds, second the giants, third growth, fourth marbling, then epd's, then defects.

sad.

 

[doc-sun]

may i ask why providing this semen would be a sound economical decision?

 

[knabe]

may i ask why providing this semen would be a sound economical decision?

only if research indicates whether he (or recent progeny) should be used based on current performance epd's as giving up $1000 is merely a donation and not sound economics at all unless one's accountant could utilize a deduction. 

otherwise, he is a benchmark for early, wide angus genetics and somewhat of an eclectic direction. he would be interesting as stated earlier to see what putative recessives he has and where they might lead.  essentially, he is a benchmark for relatively pure angus genetics.

at this point, why would anyone turn in any more dna at their own costs so defects could be found and anyone that uses it can be labeled evil.

 

[SWMO]

One of my neighbors runs a small commercial herd of black cows.  These cows are angus based and he bought a simm/angus bull to use on them.  This fall he had a hydra calf that had to be c sectioned out.  When asked he was not aware of the genetic issues that are cropping up in the angus and angus based breeds.

THAT is why ALL purebred breeders should care.  Especially if you are marketing black genetics.  These commercial guys sometimes aren't aware of these issues until they crop up in their herds. 

Do you think hewill be wild about purchasing another black bull?  Especially if he has anymore issues with genetics?

Just My opinion.

 

[knabe]

Yes

 

[doc-sun]

SWMO: IMO from my experience in the majority of cases it costs less for the bull breeder to make it right with your neighbor and subsequently help him with selection than it will to test for every recessive gene that researchers find. theirs is a never ending search by people who mostly stayed in school to avoid adapting to a job in the real world and never learning the correlation between the world they chose and making a profit although these testing fees may be a step in that direction if they didn't ignore the cost vs benefit principle.

 

[SWMO]

OK, so how much responsibility does the bull breeder have as opposed to the person that sold the females that were also carriers?  How does that responsibility get split.  Or if he has retained females from a previous carrier bull?  How do you go about making it right?  Just curious  as the bulls breeder are you willing to stand the cost of the c section, the cost of the lost calf and the cost of replacing a female that is now a cull and no longer a productive unit on the commercial cowman's farm.  And say this is multiplied several times over the course of a calving season.  Wouldn't it just make sense to manage your known genetic defects from the getgo either by testing for known issues or by breeding to known carrier Free genetics?  Just curious as to how you would go about compensating the bull or female buyer. 

I don't see the reasoning behind bashing researchers.  Test become much less cost prohibitive when those test become widely used.  However, to avoid having to do testing wouldn't it be better to just avoid using the "dirty" genetics altogether.  That way you don't have to worry about spending "unnecessary" money.

 

[Okotoks]

SWMO: IMO from my experience in the majority of cases it costs less for the bull breeder to make it right with your neighbor and subsequently help him with selection than it will to test for every recessive gene that researchers find. theirs is a never ending search by people who mostly stayed in school to avoid adapting to a job in the real world and never learning the correlation between the world they chose and making a profit although these testing fees may be a step in that direction if they didn't ignore the cost vs benefit principle.

It does get expensive testing but paying for a c section, compensating for one dead calf or cow would probably cover the cost of testing every cow in most people's herds. I know a commercial breeder who ended up doing the compensating for a couple of commercial bred heifers he had sold in his sale. I can assure you he won't be buying his Angus bulls from the herd who sold him the carrier bulls.

 

[DL]

One of my neighbors runs a small commercial herd of black cows.  These cows are angus based and he bought a simm/angus bull to use on them.  This fall he had a hydra calf that had to be c sectioned out.  When asked he was not aware of the genetic issues that are cropping up in the angus and angus based breeds.

THAT is why ALL purebred breeders should care.  Especially if you are marketing black genetics.  These commercial guys sometimes aren't aware of these issues until they crop up in their herds. 

Do you think hewill be wild about purchasing another black bull?  Especially if he has anymore issues with genetics?

Just My opinion.

YUP and amen - seems to me that back in 2006 when TH and PHA reared their ugly heads some of us made some noise about just this thing, and we continued to make noise with AM, NH, OS, MA, IE etc etc  - people don't know, they don't understand and the seed stock producers are dumping carriers on unsuspecting commercial cattlemen - as I recall some of us took a great deal of flack - that approach just might bit the breeder, the association or the breed in the butt

 

[doc-sun]

OK, so how much responsibility does the bull breeder have as opposed to the person that sold the females that were also carriers?  How does that responsibility get split.  Or if he has retained females from a previous carrier bull?  How do you go about making it right?  Just curious  as the bulls breeder are you willing to stand the cost of the c section, the cost of the lost calf and the cost of replacing a female that is now a cull and no longer a productive unit on the commercial cowman's farm.  And say this is multiplied several times over the course of a calving season.  Wouldn't it just make sense to manage your known genetic defects from the getgo either by testing for known issues or by breeding to known carrier Free genetics?  Just curious as to how you would go about compensating the bull or female buyer. 

I don't see the reasoning behind bashing researchers.  Test become much less cost prohibitive when those test become widely used.  However, to avoid having to do testing wouldn't it be better to just avoid using the "dirty" genetics altogether.  That way you don't have to worry about spending "unnecessary" money.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE DAY IN THE FUTURE ALL GENETICS ARE DIRTY AFTER RECESSIVE GENE AFTER RECESSIVE GENE ARE DISCOVERED AND SUBSEQUENTLY TESTED? IT WILL COME DOWN TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN 2 CATTLEMEN.

 

[Okotoks]

OK, so how much responsibility does the bull breeder have as opposed to the person that sold the females that were also carriers?  How does that responsibility get split.  Or if he has retained females from a previous carrier bull?  How do you go about making it right?  Just curious  as the bulls breeder are you willing to stand the cost of the c section, the cost of the lost calf and the cost of replacing a female that is now a cull and no longer a productive unit on the commercial cowman's farm.  And say this is multiplied several times over the course of a calving season.  Wouldn't it just make sense to manage your known genetic defects from the getgo either by testing for known issues or by breeding to known carrier Free genetics?  Just curious as to how you would go about compensating the bull or female buyer. 

I don't see the reasoning behind bashing researchers.  Test become much less cost prohibitive when those test become widely used.  However, to avoid having to do testing wouldn't it be better to just avoid using the "dirty" genetics altogether.  That way you don't have to worry about spending "unnecessary" money.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE DAY IN THE FUTURE ALL GENETICS ARE DIRTY AFTER RECESSIVE GENE AFTER RECESSIVE GENE ARE DISCOVERED AND SUBSEQUENTLY TESTED? IT WILL COME DOWN TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN 2 CATTLEMEN.

I think it is the lethal recessives that are the major concern. When there are deformed calves, dead calves, c sections and dead cows involved purebred breeders need to provide the info. Very few commercial producers are going to buy carrier bulls if they know the status. It's hard to build a relationship with a seedstock producer if he is willing to let his customer take the risks. Why wouldn't he just buy bulls where the info is provided and save all the trouble. I would be pretty grumpy after night with a wreck if I knew it could have been avoided with some responsbility on the part of the seller.

 

[SWMO]

I agree it is the relationships that you build with your customers that matter.  But you did not answer the question as to how much compensation that you are willing to withstand.

There are going to be many more recessive genes out there that will be identified I agree.  But as Okotoks said it is the lethal ones that really matter.  We lose calves for a variety of reasons, (too big, scours, predators etc) on our place and every loss is important not only economically but also personally.  I HATE TO LOSE CALVES no matter what the cause.  I am certainly unwilling to lose calves that could have been prevented with careful use of science and known pedigrees.

 

[DL]

SWMO: IMO from my experience in the majority of cases it costs less for the bull breeder to make it right with your neighbor and subsequently help him with selection than it will to test for every recessive gene that researchers find. theirs is a never ending search by people who mostly stayed in school to avoid adapting to a job in the real world and never learning the correlation between the world they chose and making a profit although these testing fees may be a step in that direction if they didn't ignore the cost vs benefit principle.

Really? You (generic) sell a bull based on his genetic merit - you expect to get (much) more that price by the pound because of genetic merit and you think spending 45 bucks to test for AM, NH and CA is less than the value of a dead calf and perhaps depending on the defect a dead or crippled cow. Why not do the right thing up front and sell bulls free of known genetic defects?

And BTW you (specific) clearly don't understand how this works - Dr B begins looking for mutations when the level of phenotypic abnormailty reaches a frequency where there is concern that it might be a genetic condition causing the problem. We the breeders and veterinarians bring him the issue and he (and BR) identify the mutation - they don't spend their life looking under every tree and bush for mutated genes - they are performing a service for us and I for one am grateful. The Missouri approach is a little different as they are looking at all the genes of some number of bulls with the notion that perhaps these combinations of alleles might (for example) increase fertility, or ADG, or marbling or whatever

I also think your notion that they don't understand the real world shows your lack of understanding of the application of genetic research - if you expect that some day all genetics are "dirty" then (a) you really don't get it and (b) I suspect that would also be the end of the human race - "dirty genes" don't just affect cattle

 

[knabe]

All genetics of all species are dirty.

Eugenics is an awfully slippery slope.

The continual bashing of people who don't "get it" puts a face on research which is negative. it encourages people to not turn in samples and is counter productive.

 

[knabe]

Muslim countries mate at a rate of 30-60% first cousin. 

They have, by far, the highest defect rate.

They are nowhere near the end.

Defects wont end anything other than relationships.

There really is no need to continually bad mouth people for not being perfect.

It makes one look bitter.

 

[CAB]

As I have been following this thread I can't help but think about how the "breeders" used to develop bloodlines by line breeding to weed out the genetic defects. It also makes me think about breeders like Ohlde and wonder if that by the way he has approached breeding cattle if has dodged some of these recessive defects. Somethings to remember and think about.