Clubby genetics for the beef industry?

[simtal]

Ok, as a general statement most of these people have raised more good ones then I'll ever have and are known for outstanding clubby replacements, steers, bulls and so on.  However, I find it really interesting that they are now promoting this "efficiency" concept with the same genetics and  the idea that their bulls sire really good feedlot cattle and as well as replacements. I think that this is steering people into the wrong direction.  Using bulls that could carry TH or PHA (or both) is not something that should be propagated.  The other common practice is to scan all bulls and use actual scan data for selection criteria or use genestar tests for feed efficiency, marbling, tenderness, etc..  While ultrasound is a great tool for measuring carcass data and evaluating sires, individual data (REA,marbling) does not mean DIDDLY SQUAT to show bull's siring potiental.  Likewise, those genestar tests are for cattle without epds (or poor ones) to show some kind of "performance" trait.  The other concept I think is ridiculous is this efficiency concept with angus cow energy values ($EN).  This is often advertised with the ohlde bred stuff.  Selection for $EN will get you small cows that don't milk or raise heavy calves.  This also doesn't get you good feedlot cattle.  The main point is if your gonna raise clubby bred stuff, thats great make show steers and have a good time.  However, don't try and sell this to main segement of the beef industry, because you can't have it both ways.

 

[kanshow]

I don't completely understand what you are getting at.   These genetic markers are just now hitting the main stream.    Why not have the information available to those who wish to use the bull.   Not every calf that bull sires is going to make it in the show ring.   The other thing is that in a few breeds and Angus is one of them, you have bulls that are not only siring show ring stars but also doing a darn good job siring cattle that work in the commercial industry - where that information counts.    I personally think that if you are promoting/selling a bull then you would be very short sighted NOT to include all the available information.    JMO. 

Also the genstar test data I've seen looks like it backs up the scan & epd data, so I think it's a tool that could be used wisely.   

 

[C-CROSS]

I beg to differ with you.  We  sell and raise the club calves and have retained and feed out the remaining steers and heifers, they go to kill in April and may and are yeilding 64-65%.  So if you do your homework and work at it it can be done (clapping)

 

[kanshow]

I agree C-Cross!  And good Job on the yield report!!!  There is no reason these cattle can't do both.   

 

[simtal]

I agree that individual data is important, but not having epds to back it up is a problem.  For example, I seen an ad for a bull sale where most of the bulls are sired by who, meyer, heat wave, wild card, and others.  The ad goes on later about how "commercial oriented" these bulls are and how their calves feed/kill well and so on.  They had scan data on all bulls and performance data included. Now you tell me how those bulls are "commercial oriented"?  I don't see why commercial cattlemen (guys who make their livelihood on selling feeder calves and possibly retained ownership, not show cattle types) would buy into this.  I mean come on, these bulls weren't bred for the beef industry, they were bred to make show steers!

 

[shortyisqueen]

Simtal, I do see the point you are making. Some clubby genetics translate very well into feedlot cattle...but for some, I question the fertility, foraging ability and general functionality of these cattle if they are to be promoted as 'commercial'. Some have single-trait selected for show ring appeal, a round muscle shape which does not necessarily translate into extra marbling, and width to such an extreme that we experience problems in key areas such as movement and birth weight. I think the variety of management practices is evident just from reading around this board. Commercial producers are generally less forgiving if their bull sires a huge calf, and they usually ship the bull if his daughters have no milk, even if they have 'the look.'

I find numbers of any sort are really best compared within that person's herd, as numbers can be fudged pretty easily. There are different types and breeds of cattle for a reason. No breed/bloodline can do ALL things better than a breed/bloodline that has been selected generation after generation to focus on their strong points. Its sorta like breeding a draft horse to run the Kentucky Derby.

 

[C-CROSS]

Numbers and B-dates within the purebred business are messed with daily.  They don't always tell the story either.  We have had purebred cattle with a huge defect and were threatened for slander form the association.  We even had pictures, the calves were at the State college, the vet who pulled and everything.  You can make educated decissions within your own herds as to what may or may not work, however dissing the club calf breeders is not the right way to go about it.

 

[CAB]

A bigger factor than yield is cuttability. Let's take a 1250 lb steer X .64%= 800 lb carcass. Take that carcass X .55% & then 50% and see what you get as far as saleable product is.40 lbs difference X boxed beef price =s quite a bit of money. Most people think that clubbie sired calves can't grade, but that would be wrong also. As far as the TH PHA thing goes, I don't want to see it get into the commercial side of things, but if the cattle are going to kill it is a mute point as long as the commercial people don't retain heifers out of carrier bulls. Quite frankly, if that was the scenario, terminal X, the carrier clubbie bulls would help a lot of people by raising the cutability of their cattle.

 

[shortyisqueen]

Agreed, C-Cross! No dissing!

There is likely a large number of purebred cattle that are non-functional, pampered, number-fudged specimens as well that should not be going into the commercial herd either...but because people can get them sold as a bull, they don't bother to cut what should be cut. But the thread title was specific to clubby genetics.... Although I was referring to anything that was bred for the sole purpose of winning the show, not specifically 'crossbred' or 'purebred.'

As CAB said, some 'bred for the ring' genetics yield excellent carcass results. The most clubby heifer we ever showed (phenotypically) went on to be the Champion Carcass at the Calgary Stampede over 60 other steers and heifers. We didn't think she would make much of a cow, so that's why she went there... We had more people walk by and say 'wow, that's a heck of a STEER' because she was so round muscled and they'd have to do a double-take when we told them she wasn't a he. She might have been a little lacking in the milk dept.

 

[chambero]

What you aren't taking into consideration is how sorry 90% of commercial cattle are?

"Show steer" oriented genetics may not be perfect, but they are a whole lot better in the grand scheme of things than your average rancher.  The "good average" rancher maybe buys purebred bulls but most likely doesn't.  His cow herd is every color and combination under the sun. 

How much kill data have you seen from the leftovers from steer operations that are sent to the feedlots?  Show some data!  They are pretty darned good.  Look at results from carcass shows.  I've posted links to Houston's carcass contests several times.  I've seen no data that backs up the claims that show calf genetics don't work in the feedlot.

Our kill data from our 05 calf crop (75 hd mixed group of steers and heifers with bloodlines such as Meyer, Full Flush, Pistol Pete, Smithbilt, Magic, and true Chi-Angus bulls):
1242 lbs avg, 2.73 lbs/day, 71.8% Choice, 66.2% YG 1/2, 12.88 RE

Whether you think these numbers are good or not, the feedlot they were sent to in NE called us last year to buy them again - which is what matters to us.

Also, this feedlot sells a whole lot of bulls - one of the largest groups in the country.  You see a lot of them from show steer bloodlines including some Heat Waves.  No one bull works on every cow herd.  Its always a matter of mixing and matching to enhance your weaknesses.

I should be getting kill data from last years calf crop data any time.

 

[red]

Chambero, if I remember from last year it was very impressive. any idea how it's going to stack up this year?

Red

 

[chambero]

Our cattle have been sold to a feedlot in SW Nebraska.  I think they were killed in late Feb 07.  Apparently that real bad ice storm they had in Jan 07 knocked everything in the feedlot back a little.  I'd like to see a little higher daily gains from this year's cattle, but I think they feed them a little slower on purpose trying to improve marbling, etc.

 

[fluffer]

Yes you can have it both ways. 

Take Dream On for example, and 2 individuals out of our herd sired by him by similar angus cows.  We took 1 and steered him, the other we sent to go on test and sell in a large bull sale (over 500 head)  Our Steer won his class at the county fair (a very competitive co fair) and ran hard in division.  He fed great, looked great, etc.  The Bull sold for $3750, scored better then average on feed efficiency, REA, IMF, and also looked pretty good and sold to a comercial producer.

While out at this sale, I was humbled at how small of a beef world I live in.  There was 1 buyer at this bull sale that needed over 70 bulls.  There was a seller at the sale that had over 140 bulls in the sale.  The feed lot where the bulls were put on test is over 36,000 head.  The bulls at this sale averaged probably $3400.00 with the Crossbred unregistered 3 or 4 ways cross (simmi, angus, gelbvieh, charolais, and red angus were the only breeds involved) brought an average of $3500 (highest of all the bulls that sold).  The Angus were probably around $3200 and the RA and Charolais were lower.  The lowest any bull brought was $1750- I think only 1 sold for that, most brought $3000.00 or more. 



I ride the fence between show stock and feeder cattle.  But I breed for feeder cattle and if I get lucky and get a pretty on, we break it and show it.  Feeder cattle pay our bills and like Chambero said what matters is that your customer who feeds your cattle are happy.

Fluffer

 

[SDCC]

  The other concept I think is ridiculous is this efficiency concept with angus cow energy values ($EN).  This is often advertised with the ohlde bred stuff.  Selection for $EN will get you small cows that don't milk or raise heavy calves.  This also doesn't get you good feedlot cattle.

This concept is far from ridiculous. This concept will generate smaller framed, more efficient cows that can wean a higher percentage of their body weight in calves on less acres of land, be easier fleshing and breed back easier. This  means higher stocking rates and more pounds of calves to sell per acre at higher price per pound. Calves  that will require less days on feed and require less corn to finish.Last time I looked 500 pound feeder calves sold for more money per pound than 600 pound feeder calves. I do agree we need to keep the carriers out of the commercial segment of the beef industry. 

 

[garybob]

  The other concept I think is ridiculous is this efficiency concept with angus cow energy values ($EN).  This is often advertised with the ohlde bred stuff.  Selection for $EN will get you small cows that don't milk or raise heavy calves.  This also doesn't get you good feedlot cattle.

This concept is far from ridiculous. This concept will generate smaller framed, more efficient cows that can wean a higher percentage of their body weight in calves on less acres of land, be easier fleshing and breed back easier. This  means higher stocking rates and more pounds of calves to sell per acre at higher price per pound. Calves  that will require less days on feed and require less corn to finish.Last time I looked 500 pound feeder calves sold for more money per pound than 600 pound feeder calves. I do agree we need to keep the carriers out of the commercial segment of the beef industry.   

We also, Ladies and Gents, need to rid the Carriers from Bovine gene Pool. It is often said, regarding calving ease,  by BOTH Cattlemen and Breed Associations,"a dead calf never grows".

Them dead 'uns don't win any Shows, either. Not even a measly, little County Fair, or Saturday Jackpot Show.

GB

 

[OH Breeder]

We are not commercial folks, but I do have some cows that come from commercially oriented roots. I have used "club" bulls on these cows and have May babies that compete very well at our county fair against Jan, Feb & March's. Attached you will find a May calf that is doing super. It works for us.

 

[aj]

How were you threatened form slander and what assc.? Pounds weaned per cow exposed is a decent measure of a cow herds economic success.What are the death loss on having 160# baby calves?

 

[simtal]

To say cow size is related to efficiency is false.  Efficient cattle are efficient regardless of size.

 

[knabe]

efficiency in some's mind might be bone mass to saleable meat product.

on the other side, how much money is in offal and bone?  we always get told everything is used, even the fur balls.

can't believe the fluctuating cow herd doesn't affect pricing.

 

[garybob]

Didn't the Red Angus people invent the Net-energy Maintenance EPD first? I think it's a great tool. Like everything else, though, it needs to be used for its intended purpose.

GB