Interesting reading on Sullivan flyer !!!!!

[PDJ]

As a side note, did anyone else notice that the Loving bull with the 3.25 frame was out of a 14 month old heifer?  Wonder what affect this would have on both the 64 pound birthweight and the small frame size...

Lot 12 catalog said FS 4 or am I missing something?

Ooops, edited my post.  I was looking at something else at the same time, and need to remember my old brain can't multitask.

 

[kfacres]

As a side note, did anyone else notice that the Loving bull with the 4 frame was out of a 14 month old heifer?  Wonder what affect this would have on both the 64 pound birthweight and the small frame size...

14 mo at breeding? or 14 mo at calving?

We had an 18 month old heifer calve once--- 95# bull calf...  purebred shorthorn..

 

[PDJ]

As a side note, did anyone else notice that the Loving bull with the 4 frame was out of a 14 month old heifer?  Wonder what affect this would have on both the 64 pound birthweight and the small frame size...

14 mo at breeding? or 14 mo at calving?

We had an 18 month old heifer calve once--- 95# bull calf...  purebred shorthorn..

The catolog says calved at 14 months.

 

[kfacres]

As a side note, did anyone else notice that the Loving bull with the 4 frame was out of a 14 month old heifer?  Wonder what affect this would have on both the 64 pound birthweight and the small frame size...

14 mo at breeding? or 14 mo at calving?

We had an 18 month old heifer calve once--- 95# bull calf...  purebred shorthorn..

The catolog says calved at 14 months.

almost has to be a mistake...what's the link to the catalog, or a reg #?

17-18-19 months is about the youngest we've ever had accidents happen on our dairy side of things.  When we keep back bull calves- we always seem to run them with the group of heifers one age break younger-- to avoid the breeding those heifers the same age, at a young age.  One year, we had about a half dozen heifers calve at that 18 month mark-- it wasn't pretty, and we pulled every calf... but I don't remember any kicking off.

 

[nate53]

[/quote]

almost has to be a mistake...what's the link to the catalog, or a reg #?

[/quote]
No Mistake.  Well at least not on the statement of calving at 14 months!
Reg. x4176964
http://lovingfarms.com/ForSale.html

It doesn't happen often is a little bit of a understatement!

 

[JTM]

GW, I still say the total picture needs to be evaluated to truly measure profit,I guess we will agree to disagree.The calves  were aprox 6 mo old.
What are your thoughts on Midnight Lute as a stallion?

I'm with r.n. reed on this. I think we need to make sure we have a good balance of traits. Performance in all areas, not just growth, will bring you profit and your customers profit. Just like in the show cattle industry, when people select constantly for phenotype, growth, and other structural traits. What traits have not been paid as much attention too?

 

[knabe]

What traits have not been paid as much attention too?

Females. Longer flatter, muscles.  Older cows so you can see udder teat traits, femininity, flatness of shoulder, long narrow teats, good level udder with good forward volume, lower vulva placement, more rearward tail set so poo doesn't stay on vulva, clear female head,polled, a balance of dimension  with equal parts rearmmiddlemand front, softness of pasterns

Bulls.  Masculinity, clear set to hock with soft pasterns, secondary sexual characteristics.

Both with older animal classes so people can see what mature animals look like. Shows are too much of a futurity, just like horse racing and have lost their appeal to people outside the show circles.

 

[Mill Iron A]

I could agree with that the finer points of evaluation have been lost and therefore we are losing some of the stockmen in all of us when we don't pay closer attention.  With any market in mind but using commercial cattle as an example, why don't we ever find the market first? Instead of complaining about price why can't we research what we willlproduce and then stick to it.  Same with cow size.  We can handle a 5 to 6 frame cow in our environment.  She needs to be of a certain build like big ribbed,  sound, feminine, etc. So I know that I need to go fin a bull that will produce that cow and then pack as much muscle and performance as I possibly can without sacrificing the bottom of the pyramid traits.

 

[RyanChandler]

What traits have not been paid as much attention too?

Females. Longer flatter, muscles.  Older cows so you can see udder teat traits, femininity, flatness of shoulder, long narrow teats, good level udder with good forward volume, lower vulva placement, more rearward tail set so poo doesn't stay on vulva, clear female head,polled, a balance of dimension  with equal parts rearmmiddlemand front, softness of pasterns

Bulls.   Masculinity, clear set to hock with soft pasterns, secondary sexual characteristics.

Both with older animal classes so people can see what mature animals look like. Shows are too much of a futurity, just like horse racing and have lost their appeal to people outside the show circles.

Forward volume. You very rarely see any cows that carry any.  I have some half blonde d' cows that have the ideal level udders that have that good length from front to back.  Not too many shorthorns (that Ive seen) with this type bag.

 

[kfacres]

Here is a couple of charts that I put together to add to the discussion- they combine Angus, Sim, SimAngus, Red Angus, a touch of Lim, Gelv, and a Polled Herf from the WIU Bull test since 08.  This graph compares Frame Score to Feed Efficiency...

 

[jaimiediamond]

• We need more performance in our Shorthorn Yard cattle to compete with Angus, Simmental, Charolais and Hereford.
• Check out www.angus.org - Champion Carload of 10 Angus Bulls - January bulls averaged 1,420 lbs.; frame 6.5 bulls. Reserve Champion
Carload of 10 Bulls - January 20th to February 13th averaged 1,310 lbs. Both Angus Carloads WDA higher than any Shorthorn Pen.
• Sullivan Farms February Grand Champion Pen of 5 Shorthorn bulls WDA was 3.66 - 1,192 lbs. average weight. Average weight for the
Angus Febraury Pen Bulls in a class of five entries was 1,315 lbs., 1,298 lbs., 1,270 lbs., 1,187 lbs., and 1,143 lbs.
• The Angus yard bulls averaged almost a full frame score over the Shorthorn yard bulls.
• Shorthorn breeders is it possible? Are we raising our bulls too small framed to sire profitable feeder cattle?
• The moderate English bred cow herds dominating our countryside would prosper with the injection of a stout 6+ framed Shorthorn bull,
in the feedlot, replacement pen or on the plate.
• The Continental cows in commercial herds would benefit from the maternal traits and marbling a Shorthorn bull would inject.
• Breeder focused on balanced multiple traits selection, with eye appeal always have a demand for their product. Balance never goes out of style.
• Frame 5 and 7 purebred cattle can be used as breeding tools but that is because generally you are not in the ideal situation.

I have just finished reading a lot of opinions regarding what Sullivan's have in their flyer.  To be honest A LOT of breeders and their programs got smeared by other breeders of Shorthorn cattle and even breeders of other breeds of cattle.  To me that is uncalled for, I may not want to use genetics from person A as they don't fit what I need in the environment our cattle survive in but that doesn't mean that person A's program doesn't have a place. 

Moreover I thought that some of the flyer's points were interesting and forward thinking.  One point that really hits home for me is "balance never goes out of style".  I sometimes fear we are riding on a pendulum when it comes to cattle swinging back and forth between fads.

Here is an Angus program where they aim for performance http://www.schaffangusvalley.com/sale-bulls.html

 

[thunderdownunder]

• We need more performance in our Shorthorn Yard cattle to compete with Angus, Simmental, Charolais and Hereford.
• Check out www.angus.org - Champion Carload of 10 Angus Bulls - January bulls averaged 1,420 lbs.; frame 6.5 bulls. Reserve Champion
Carload of 10 Bulls - January 20th to February 13th averaged 1,310 lbs. Both Angus Carloads WDA higher than any Shorthorn Pen.
• Sullivan Farms February Grand Champion Pen of 5 Shorthorn bulls WDA was 3.66 - 1,192 lbs. average weight. Average weight for the
Angus Febraury Pen Bulls in a class of five entries was 1,315 lbs., 1,298 lbs., 1,270 lbs., 1,187 lbs., and 1,143 lbs.
• The Angus yard bulls averaged almost a full frame score over the Shorthorn yard bulls.
• Shorthorn breeders is it possible? Are we raising our bulls too small framed to sire profitable feeder cattle?
• The moderate English bred cow herds dominating our countryside would prosper with the injection of a stout 6+ framed Shorthorn bull,
in the feedlot, replacement pen or on the plate.
• The Continental cows in commercial herds would benefit from the maternal traits and marbling a Shorthorn bull would inject.
• Breeder focused on balanced multiple traits selection, with eye appeal always have a demand for their product. Balance never goes out of style.
• Frame 5 and 7 purebred cattle can be used as breeding tools but that is because generally you are not in the ideal situation.

I have just finished reading a lot of opinions regarding what Sullivan's have in their flyer.  To be honest A LOT of breeders and their programs got smeared by other breeders of Shorthorn cattle and even breeders of other breeds of cattle.  To me that is uncalled for, I may not want to use genetics from person A as they don't fit what I need in the environment our cattle survive in but that doesn't mean that person A's program doesn't have a place. 

Moreover I thought that some of the flyer's points were interesting and forward thinking.  One point that really hits home for me is "balance never goes out of style".  I sometimes fear we are riding on a pendulum when it comes to cattle swinging back and forth between fads.

Here is an Angus program where they aim for performance http://www.schaffangusvalley.com/sale-bulls.html

(clapping) (clapping)

Here's another Angus program that focuses on performance and carcase.

 

[GONEWEST]

Here is a couple of charts that I put together to add to the discussion- they combine Angus, Sim, SimAngus, Red Angus, a touch of Lim, Gelv, and a Polled Herf from the WIU Bull test since 08.  This graph compares Frame Score to Feed Efficiency...

Full of BS:

What is the F:G mean? Is that pounds of feed per pound of gain?

 

[RyanChandler]

Yes

 

[kfacres]

Yes

x2..

For some reason, the real chart-- didn't attach.. will get it later.. it shows all data in comb with each other..

 

[DRB]

Yes

x2..

For some reason, the real chart-- didn't attach.. will get it later.. it shows all data in comb with each other..

Can you explain a bit more?  The Ideal/Perfect scenario on the comparison one doesn't make sense to me - if F:G is lbs of feed per lb gained - ie 6.4 lbs of feed per 1 lb gain, then it wouldn't be the ideal...  I assume I have it backwards.  Please confirm.
Good info.

 

[kfacres]

Yes

x2..

For some reason, the real chart-- didn't attach.. will get it later.. it shows all data in comb with each other..

Can you explain a bit more?  The Ideal/Perfect scenario on the comparison one doesn't make sense to me - if F:G is lbs of feed per lb gained - ie 6.4 lbs of feed per 1 lb gain, then it wouldn't be the ideal...  I assume I have it backwards.  Please confirm.
Good info.

let me double check my numbers-- I think you may be right- and I have things switched up in the copying from the reports..

will get back with you..

It should be pounds of feed consumed to pounds of weight gained-- I have a feeling that I screwed something up...

 

[kfacres]

Yes

x2..

For some reason, the real chart-- didn't attach.. will get it later.. it shows all data in comb with each other..

Can you explain a bit more?  The Ideal/Perfect scenario on the comparison one doesn't make sense to me - if F:G is lbs of feed per lb gained - ie 6.4 lbs of feed per 1 lb gain, then it wouldn't be the ideal...  I assume I have it backwards.  Please confirm.
Good info.

corrected graph...  I had some numbers mixed around-- attached...

This week, if have time- may come up with a couple graphs reflecting price sold for to frame score- and adj 365 day weights to frame score.  Anything else anyone would want to see-- I have an unlimited ammount of data on the bulls- of about every measurable trait.

I guess one thing to conclude- is that the most efficient animal- is anywhere from the high 5 to low 6 frame...  Really wish there was more data for 4 and 7/8 frames- but I guess that just goes to show that people who wish to produce commercial bulls in the midwest- don't think either frame scores will sell== and so they don't bring them into test.

 

[DRB]

Yes

x2..

For some reason, the real chart-- didn't attach.. will get it later.. it shows all data in comb with each other..

Can you explain a bit more?  The Ideal/Perfect scenario on the comparison one doesn't make sense to me - if F:G is lbs of feed per lb gained - ie 6.4 lbs of feed per 1 lb gain, then it wouldn't be the ideal...  I assume I have it backwards.  Please confirm.
Good info.

corrected graph...  I had some numbers mixed around-- attached...

This week, if have time- may come up with a couple graphs reflecting price sold for to frame score- and adj 365 day weights to frame score.  Anything else anyone would want to see-- I have an unlimited ammount of data on the bulls- of about every measurable trait.

I guess one thing to conclude- is that the most efficient animal- is anywhere from the high 5 to low 6 frame...  Really wish there was more data for 4 and 7/8 frames- but I guess that just goes to show that people who wish to produce commercial bulls in the midwest- don't think either frame scores will sell== and so they don't bring them into test.

Thanks!  From the plots of the data it would seem that there are bulls in all frame score groups that are hitting that 5 lb feed : 1 lb gain.  Perhaps more bulls in the 5-6 frame range hit that, but there seems to be quite the spread, best 4.5:1 and worst 8+:1 overall among all bulls.  Would indicate that a lot of genetic improvement could be made with proper selection.

 

[Shady Lane]

Yes

x2..

For some reason, the real chart-- didn't attach.. will get it later.. it shows all data in comb with each other..

Can you explain a bit more?  The Ideal/Perfect scenario on the comparison one doesn't make sense to me - if F:G is lbs of feed per lb gained - ie 6.4 lbs of feed per 1 lb gain, then it wouldn't be the ideal...  I assume I have it backwards.  Please confirm.
Good info.

corrected graph...  I had some numbers mixed around-- attached...

This week, if have time- may come up with a couple graphs reflecting price sold for to frame score- and adj 365 day weights to frame score.  Anything else anyone would want to see-- I have an unlimited ammount of data on the bulls- of about every measurable trait.

I guess one thing to conclude- is that the most efficient animal- is anywhere from the high 5 to low 6 frame...  Really wish there was more data for 4 and 7/8 frames- but I guess that just goes to show that people who wish to produce commercial bulls in the midwest- don't think either frame scores will sell== and so they don't bring them into test.

Still not following your logic here???

According to the numbers you have provided, the largesr frame score bulls posted the lowest Feed per pound of gain numbers, making them the more efficient animals???