One of our junior herd sires

[Okotoks]

Are there ddg sources up in Canada? Ethenol plants?

Canada is a cold country covered with ice and snow where people live in igloos and keep 2000 lb pet show cows that deliver their 200 lb calves semi annually by c-section*

*source AJ's Canadian Fact Book 2013

There are some conspiracy theories out there that Canada shares the longest unprotected international border with the US and surprisingly there isn't much difference on either side of that border. These theories should be ignored wherever possible.

http://www.ddgs.usask.ca/MarketingandTechInfo/EthanolIndustryStatusinWesternCanada.aspx

We also have great bulls like HC Free Spirit

 

[aj]

As in most of the Canadian stories on here........give a stretchhhh here and stretch there and you have a damn good story.

 

[knabe]

give a stretchhhh here and stretch there and you have a damn good story.

not near as tall a story as the heavily used club calf and purebred AI sires from sod house.

 

[jaimiediamond]

As in most of the Canadian stories on here........give a stretchhhh here and stretch there and you have a damn good story.

Funny how you constantly accuse others of the flaw that is most evident in you.

Craig Hoyt I invite you to come up and visit our herd.  Then I can take you on another couple of herd tours which were mentioned yet called stretching the truth.  You will need the follow items for this journey, a calculator and paper to keep track of cattle numbers and most importantly the ability to enjoy good stock in two breeds and one commercial operation   I even will further the invite to my place to save on hotel this has risk as my cooking is terrifying

 

[justintime]

As in most of the Canadian stories on here........give a stretchhhh here and stretch there and you have a damn good story.

If you had to live in an igloo for 10 months of the year, with 4 months of total darkness,  with no TV and only occasional internet service, and have whale blubber ( imported from Kansas)  as your main food source ..... you probably would become a good story teller too!

 

[aj]

Study after study  after study sites that bigger bwt's cause dystocia in beef production. The bigger bwt calves have a higher incidence of having a front leg back. I don't think this is argueable. Even with antedotal evidnce from a 750 head cow herd in Canada. We have a big birth weight problem in the Shorthorn breed. The latest herd bull issue states this. I don't see how we can ignore the problem.

 

[knabe]

What's the numbers?

It's irresponsible to just say there is an increase.

Again, with all your expertise, why aren't you the largest supplier of seed stock of shorthorns for purebred use, commercial use, and club calf use?

 

[justintime]

Study after study  after study sites that bigger bwt's cause dystocia in beef production. The bigger bwt calves have a higher incidence of having a front leg back. I don't think this is argueable. Even with antedotal evidnce from a 750 head cow herd in Canada. We have a big birth weight problem in the Shorthorn breed. The latest herd bull issue states this. I don't see how we can ignore the problem.

I will agree with you that birth weights in any breed must be a constant concern.. but we also need to be talking more about calving ease than just birth weights. We have had this discussion on here more than a few times now, and I think Shorthorn breeders are working at this. I do not see the huge problem you continually post about, in my herd, and if I did, I would be probably as vocal as you are about this problem. As I have mentioned a few times before, we have calved reasonable numbers of some other breeds along side our Shorthorns in past years, and we have found that our Shorthorn herd has consistently had fewer calving issues. We have had herds of 50-100 head of Charolais, Hereford, Simmental,and Maines, along with smaller groups of a few other breeds. We decided a few years ago, to concentrate on the Shorthorns as they were the most troublefree breed we have had here. There are many other factors that contribute to calving issues other than just birth weights. I am sure there are some who have huge issues with calving problems, but I am thinking that a portion of their problems are created when they try to breed females that do not have proper structure to calve easily. There are some females that would struggle having a Longhorn calf.. and they can be found in most breeds. That said, I agree that we need to always be conscious of birth weights, but we also have to be conscious of numerous other issues that contribute to calving problems.
I have a commercial bull buyer who has now purchased 17 Shorthorn bulls from us in the past 10 years. He was using Charolais and Angus bulls prior to his first Shorthorn bull. His cows have to calve on pasture with little supervison and he is now using only Shorthorn bulls, because he says he has fewer calving issues from the Shorthorn sires he has been using.  Two years ago, a commerical man who has 800 cows, purchased a bull in our bull sale. The bull he purchased had a BW of 105 lbs and I shuttered when he told me he had used him on his yearling heifers. When I asked him if he had many calving issues, he said he wished the Shorthorn bull had bred all his heifers, as he had virtually no problems from him, but he had to pull almost every calf sired by the Polled Hereford bull he had run in the same pasture.
I have also commented on this before as well, but we have sold over 300 bulls since I made a decision to not keep any bulls intact with BWs of 110 lb or more. These bulls have sold to herds with as many styles of management as you can imagine, and I have not had a single complaint regarding calving issues from our bulls. I would think that someone would have told me that they were having problems if this was as big an issue as you continually say it is.
We all need to use some common sense when selecting our breeding stock and we also have to have a pretty good understanding of basic structural soundness in selecting replacements for our herds.

 

[frostback]

Study after study  after study sites that bigger bwt's cause dystocia in beef production. The bigger bwt calves have a higher incidence of having a front leg back. I don't think this is argueable. Even with antedotal evidnce from a 750 head cow herd in Canada. We have a big birth weight problem in the Shorthorn breed. The latest herd bull issue states this. I don't see how we can ignore the problem.

There are also studies stating that using low BW bull after low BW bull after low BW bull will decrease the size of the heifers or cow pelvis. Meaning that they will have a hard time having calves and you would just keep having to use  smaller BW bulls. I would rather have cows that can have 100lb calves with no assistance then cows that cant have 60lb calves. My choice, I really don't care what you want, just quit telling me that I am ruining the US cattle industry or the ASA by doing so.

 

[knabe]

Hoyt for Asa president.

 

[aj]

I don't think we can ignore the problem.jmo

 

[jaimiediamond]

I don't think we can ignore the problem.jmo

I publicly invited you to come and see Diamond Shorthorns, and the two herds I have been calving out, employed to help.  I could further that invitation to calving season and you could carry the scale around for me! That sounds about as appealing as staying at my place and eating my home cooked meals which JIT definitely gave the key ingredient of whale blubber  imported from Kansas.

Honestly until you see an operation, or use their genetics implying that they are a whole lot of liars, story tellers or whatever else is in poor taste. Your correct we cannot ignore a problem in each of our own herds, the calving problem in Sodhouse doesn't affect everyone else (aside from your own buyers) as it was your program and your selection that created the problem in the first place.  also introducing another breed (red angus) is not solving a calving issue within the Shorthorn a real breeder would try to select genetics within the breed to fix the problem... If they had one... 

Unless your actually willing to travel around and visit people see their herds to identify the traits you need.  You are never actually going to find bloodlines that will fix a problem.  Right now all you do is sit in your armchair and call people liars I invite you to get out and smell the roses.

 

[Davis Shorthorns]

We as a breed in the US have to be even more watchful of our BW's than the other breeds.  We have to scrape and scratch to get a slight foothold in the commercial beef herd.  We cant be just as good we have to be better.  US breeders do have their heads in the sand when it comes to this.  Grant im sorry but imo in the US Salute is NOT any way shape or form a commercially acceptable bull.  Do they have some attributes that could be used... Yes but that what 7 bw epd will send almost every commercial guy running for the hills.  Also if you started breeding salute to the 12-1400 lb angus cow base that we see around would you still be having the same low dystocia levels as you do now with bulls like that?  I love my cows that can lay down and have a 100 lb calf, but would rather see them lay down and have a 80lb calf.  Also yes breeding generation after generation of extremely low bw cattle can shrink a pelvis.  That is what pelvic measurements are for.  Ask Lovings in they have been line breeding ultra low bw for years and actually have increased pelvic size.  Just have to watch for it.  All that being said to people that dont want to look at actual bw's and would rather look at calving ease HIGH BW'S=HARD CALVING!!!!  Sorry but on average a cow has a harder time calving a big calf than a small one. 

 

[knabe]

I don't think we can ignore the problem.jmo

They are not ignoring the problem.  Your chacterization by using the word ignore destroys any credibility you had on the issue.

Please just show everyone how it's done with your own cattle.

All you want yo do is buy a solution and continually complain but have no credibility because you haven't produced a product that people will buy that solves the problem.

Seriously, you rival old timer for density of useless posts.

On the other hand your guerilla tactics generate traffic.

Perhaps that's your only goal. It certainly isn't providing solutions.

 

[justintime]

We as a breed in the US have to be even more watchful of our BW's than the other breeds.  We have to scrape and scratch to get a slight foothold in the commercial beef herd.  We cant be just as good we have to be better.  US breeders do have their heads in the sand when it comes to this.  Grant im sorry but imo in the US Salute is NOT any way shape or form a commercially acceptable bull.  Do they have some attributes that could be used... Yes but that what 7 bw epd will send almost every commercial guy running for the hills.  Also if you started breeding salute to the 12-1400 lb angus cow base that we see around would you still be having the same low dystocia levels as you do now with bulls like that?  I love my cows that can lay down and have a 100 lb calf, but would rather see them lay down and have a 80lb calf.  Also yes breeding generation after generation of extremely low bw cattle can shrink a pelvis.  That is what pelvic measurements are for.  Ask Lovings in they have been line breeding ultra low bw for years and actually have increased pelvic size.  Just have to watch for it.  All that being said to people that dont want to look at actual bw's and would rather look at calving ease HIGH BW'S=HARD CALVING!!!!  Sorry but on average a cow has a harder time calving a big calf than a small one.

In most cases I would agree with you, but I do feel that you cannot judge all animals by one bull in his pedigree. As I mentioned earlier, I loved most everything Timeline was showing us, and if I could have changed one thing, I would have changed his pedigree to be more acceptable to many other breeders. As I also mentioned, I decided that this bull showed some traits that I wanted to improve and he needed to be tried to see if he would pass this improvement on to his offspring. He has done that in spades IMO. We now have had 3 calf crops from Timeline, and they have been 100% born unassisted. We have sold several sons to commercial producers, and they seem to like them. One producer only wanted Timeline sons this year, and another commercial operation purchased 3 Timeline sons as they said they were losing too much performance from using Shorthorn bulls from some other herds. That of course, is just their opinion.
One thing I have wanted to improve in my herd for a long time is testicle size and shape. This year when we semen tested our bulls, the vet commented that our Timeline bulls could stand up again any Angus sire group she had tested this year. Our best Timeline son had 42 cm testicles at 12 months of age and we had several others over 40 cm. Besides this size, they are well formed and hang straight. Another thing I felt we should do is make our cattle better on the inside as well the outside. The carcass data on the Timeline sons has been the best we have ever tested. I know that we have to be careful in this area, as carcass traits antagonize maternal traits, but so far, the Timeline daughters in production have beautiful udders, milk well and are very fertile.

I agree with you 100% that the Shorthorn breed has to be more watchful than many other breeds in regards to calving ease and birth weight issues. You are correct in everything you have said. I could not agree more. I think the Canadian situation is slightly different in that we don't seem to have an industry that is as brainwashed as totally in regards to the black hide color. Here in Canada, you can top the market with a red, white or roan if they are the right type. That said, marketing Shorthorns is a huge job, and you have to work at it constantly. The production side of the equation is really the easy part. Cattle buyers could care less about birthweight or calving ease as they only have to deal with performance and carcass issues in the cattle they buy for feedlots. We have to be ever conscious of all factors involved in production right from conception to the plate.

 

[Okotoks]

We as a breed in the US have to be even more watchful of our BW's than the other breeds.  We have to scrape and scratch to get a slight foothold in the commercial beef herd.  We cant be just as good we have to be better.  US breeders do have their heads in the sand when it comes to this.  Grant im sorry but imo in the US Salute is NOT any way shape or form a commercially acceptable bull.  Do they have some attributes that could be used... Yes but that what 7 bw epd will send almost every commercial guy running for the hills.  Also if you started breeding salute to the 12-1400 lb angus cow base that we see around would you still be having the same low dystocia levels as you do now with bulls like that?  I love my cows that can lay down and have a 100 lb calf, but would rather see them lay down and have a 80lb calf.  Also yes breeding generation after generation of extremely low bw cattle can shrink a pelvis.  That is what pelvic measurements are for.  Ask Lovings in they have been line breeding ultra low bw for years and actually have increased pelvic size.  Just have to watch for it.  All that being said to people that dont want to look at actual bw's and would rather look at calving ease HIGH BW'S=HARD CALVING!!!!  Sorry but on average a cow has a harder time calving a big calf than a small one.

High BW's = Hard Calving is true but large pelvis also equals calving ease. Does anyone know what the issue is with the animals with the harder calving? If you assume it's BW and keep using a smaller birth weight bulls on these bloodlines you might downsize the mature size and still have small pelvic size. A lot of the beautiful heifers winning are big girls but if they have small pelvic measurements this could be one of the issues. It almost seems that some are advocating throwing entire bloodlines away but what if some animals like HC Free Spirit have calving ease, then why not select for it across bloodlines. I know of a Salute heifer out of a cow we sold that calved unassisted as a two year old so you can't make a blanket statement it is evrey animal in a bloodline.(I have little experience with the bloodline but in the 3 I know of no issues) I think  if a heifer has serious issues culling is the answer no matter how many ribbons or fancy pedigree she might have.

 

[Duncraggan]

Just a thought, what did we do before EPD/EBV values?

A retired accountant I know, 80+ years old, told me a story about when pocket calculators came out.  It went like this:

A young salesman came to his office selling calculators.  He said he would buy one if the young man could add a journal faster than he could.

They duly completed the task in about the same time, with different totals!

The accountant's total was correct, the salesman's was not!  I don't remember the outcome of the potential sale but will ask him next time I see him!

The moral of the story, NOT ALL NEW GADGETS ARE BETTER THAN THE TRIED AND TESTED METHODS OF OLD!

Same with EPD/EBV, it is only an estimate, even though scientifically/statistically calculated!

 

[aj]

I think we need to be careful about selecting for big rea's. What is the rea per 100 weight on the timeline sons? Selecting for rea could lead to simply raising bigger carcass weights......bigger mature size. rea per 100 weight is a more valid measurement.....jmo

 

[Okotoks]

I think we need to be careful about selecting for big rea's. What is the rea per 100 weight on the timeline sons? Selecting for rea could lead to simply raising bigger carcass weights......bigger mature size. rea per 100 weight is a more valid measurement.....jmo

Unless I am mistaken all our REA's are adjusted to REA per 100's lbs. and that is what JIT is referring to. I agree REA by itself is pretty useless.

 

[knabe]

I think we need to be careful about selecting for big rea's. What is the rea per 100 weight on the timeline sons? Selecting for rea could lead to simply raising bigger carcass weights......bigger mature size. rea per 100 weight is a more valid measurement.....jmo

who is we.  you don't have any cattle that sell. ( i don't either, though i've never taken one to market and manage to sell all i breed)

http://www.thebeefsite.com/articles/1961/beef-grades-and-carcass-information

Within the beef industry, ribeye size varies greatly. Both excessively small and excessively large ribeyes are quality challenges for the beef industry. An optimum range for ribeye area is 11 to 15 sq. in. Ribeye area targets should be approximately 1.6 to 1.8 sq. in. per 100 pounds of carcass weight. Results from the Mississippi Farm to Feedlot program show that ribeye area averaged 12.95 sq. in., and ribeye area per 100 pounds of carcass weight (cwt) averaged 1.74 sq. in.

the "optimum" spread suggests that large ribeye's are not that much of a problem and in my opinion, are not coming from bulls with slightly large rib eyes used on 1000=1400 lb cows.

i'm probably wrong, but do you have any REAL numbers on percent carcasses rejected for too large a rib eye?

with your expert breeding knowledge in a multi-generational contemporary group of cattle, what size ribeye in a bull can lead to a significant dock in carcass due to what size rib eye in a bull?  how hard is it to undo with a smaller ribeye bull and what is the relationship with cow size in increments of size with the same bull with a "too large" ribeye versus the "optimum" ribeye?

in general, at least in california, i see lots of cattle with inadequate ribeye.  granted, i've only looked at a few thousand the last 10 years.  i never even saw ONE in all that time that alarmed be, oh my goodness, there's a massive rib eyed steer.  i wonder who the bull was and who was the stupid producer, i hope they are out of business.