PHA calf video

[Show Heifer]

Some people don't understand, and hence the vigilance. It take two to make a dead, deformed calf, and it takes on parent carrier to create more carriers which in turn can create a dead deformed calf. As long as everyone understands that and test, we'll a be hunky dory!!!

 

[itk]

DL, I'm not going to watch your video(I can't even watch doctor shows on tv) but thank you for posting it. I think it is important to educate people on what can happen when carriers are mated to carriers. We have never had a TH or PHA calf but just the thought of what could happen is enough to prevent me from mating carriers. IMO most people who bred carriers to carrier don't think defective calves can  be that bad but hopefully now people will realize what a gruesome result is possible.

itk - sounds like you wouldn't be much help in the surgery room ;D


DL The first calf my son ever saw born was a c-section when he was around four. The next calf that was born came naturally and my son was for sure that something was wrong with the calf since we didn't have to cut open the cow's tummy. For some reason I'm fine in the heat of the moment performing cattle operations but the thought of sitting down and watching a PHA calf be "born" doesn't appeal to me at all. Like I said before just the thought of having to get one of those calves out of a cow is enough for me never to mate 2 carriers.

 

[Doc]

TH just isn't in post legged "steer bulls" it is everywhere. Some of the most respected commercial breeders in the nation have knowingly or unknowingly used carrier genetics. Go look at a pasture of Improver 57 daughters and tell me that we need to get rid of all carrier cows or that they have no place in the industry. There are numerous THC cows that can have a tremendous commercial impact through their THF offspring. Test all of her calves and if they are THC cut the bull calves and keep the heifers that will improve your herd. If they are THF the sky is the limit. There is a fine line that can be walked with this whole genetic defect situation. IMO those who are able to get the positive traits from carrier lines in a none carrier animal will be ahead in the long run. One of the happiest days of my life was finding out that our Dream Girl donor was THF. However if she was THC it wouldn't have made her any less of a cow in our eyes because 50% of her calves would still be THF. We have several pregnancies coming out of her and Eagle 148 this spring. We feel this is an outstanding mating, and even if she would have been THC there would be at least one THF son that could do the breed a world of good. My biggest frustration with PHA and TH is the perception that it only occurs in show cattle but that couldn't be farther from the truth.

DL, I'm not going to watch your video(I can't even watch doctor shows on tv) but thank you for posting it. I think it is important to educate people on what can happen when carriers are mated to carriers. We have never had a TH or PHA calf but just the thought of what could happen is enough to prevent me from mating carriers. IMO most people who bred carriers to carrier don't think defective calves can  be that bad but hopefully now people will realize what a gruesome result is possible.

I've got to agree with you ITK. I will not just go out & ship any carrier cows just because they are THC. Now I had 2 that it was the final nail in their culling coffin & they got shipped. I won't use a carrier bull natural service , though.

 

[SWMO]

I still think that you guys are missing the BIG picture.  ANIMAL WELFARE  have you seen the videos of the poor abused dogs and horses? Even in SW Missouri it makes the news BiG TIME.  Think how the video that DL posted would play with the right commentary. I could come up with some great stuff myself and I love animal agriculture and am a firm believer in personal freedom.

Think how the commercial guy with 100 plus cows to calve in the middle of January would feel if he even lost a small percentage of his COWS and CALVES due to having purchased two different carrier bulls over the course of several years and retained OUTSTANDING heifers and had the misfortune of mating those OUTSTANDING replacement heifers/cows to a carrier bull that he purchased because he has had good success or advice from a purebred breeder (with few scruples or simply uniformed himself).  I know the stress we go through calving out the 20-30 cows that we calve out each Spring.  Can you imagine the wreck and the stress in calving out 100+ with this potential problem then add in the financial loss that commercial producer has experienced when he makes his entire living on those cows.  He will never come back to your breed or to you as a producer.  Respect is very hard to regain after it is lost.  It is not a matter of if this happens but when.

Las Vegas is a great place to gamble.  My reputation is not

Judy

 

[itk]

SWMO there is a big difference between the resulting offspring of a genetic defect and animal cruelty. Lethal genetic defects are in every specie of animal from alligators to zebras. Purebred sheep hogs horses cattle and even dogs have genetic defects appear in the population from time to time but it is no way abuse but a part of nature. I admit it is or job as caretakes to try to prevent these occurrences but it dose happen. We would never think of charging the parents of a baby who died from a gentic disorder with child abuse.

If you read my post I have nothing but the utmost respect for these defects and feel that they need to be handled with care. I would never sell a potential carrier to a commercial operation or anyone for that matter unless they were fully aware of the long term ramifications. That is why I say cut all carrier males and retain all carrier females in order to stop the defect from spreading. I admit that there are unsavory people in the cattle industry who would not give a second thought to selling a carrier animal to a unknowing buyer. However lumping those of us who are trying to preserve the positive traits that some carrier animals poses and who manage their genetic status diligently in with the lowest common denominator in the cattle industry is a bit offensive.

 

[DL]

SWMO there is a big difference between the resulting offspring of a genetic defect and animal cruelty. Lethal genetic defects are in every specie of animal from alligators to zebras. Purebred sheep hogs horses cattle and even dogs have genetic defects appear in the population from time to time but it is no way abuse but a part of nature. I admit it is or job as caretakes to try to prevent these occurrences but it dose happen. We would never think of charging the parents of a baby who died from a gentic disorder with child abuse.

If you read my post I have nothing but the utmost respect for these defects and feel that they need to be handled with care. I would never sell a potential carrier to a commercial operation or anyone for that matter unless they were fully aware of the long term ramifications. That is why I say cut all carrier males and retain all carrier females in order to stop the defect from spreading. I admit that there are unsavory people in the cattle industry who would not give a second thought to selling a carrier animal to a unknowing buyer. However lumping those of us who are trying to preserve the positive traits that some carrier animals poses and who manage their genetic status diligently in with the lowest common denominator in the cattle industry is a bit offensive.

AH itk - just when we were appearing to agree on things! Yes genetic defects are everywhere and in every species - BUT WE (STUPID?) humans, in  the name of something (show ring greatness, genetic improvement, the almighty dollar - who knows?) have greatly increased the prevalence of the TH and PHA mutations (and probably FCS and longnose dwarf in the Angus breed) by our breeding strategies - so no you wouldn't blame the parents who have a child with a lethal genetic defect (although I must admit that in those cases where testing is available and both parents are carriers I wonder...) BUT I can and will blame (point the finger?) at breeders who knowingly (or unknowingly - after all don't breeders have a responsibility to educate themselves??) breed carrier to carrier and have a PHA calf.

I agree with SWMO - this is a welfare issue - what I haven't figured out is when you breed 2 carriers when does it become a welfare issue (only when there is a PHA calf?) and when it is shear human stupidity and greed - how could a person who really cares about their animals knowingly expose their cow to this horrific event??

 

[SWMO]

itk, I never intend to offend anybody (sorry).

However, there are many youngsters or breeders that are new to the cattle industry  in this business that are retaining the animals they show and breeding them.  Many times these youngsters (or New to the Business) are truly uninformed not through anything but inexperience and tend to use the bull(s) that are most poplular in the business at that time.  These are the breeders that are going to get in severe trouble and may even quite a breed or the industry altogether if they have a PHA wreck.  It takes all the fun out of breeding livestock when you lose a baby regardless of species especially under the horrific circumstances of a PHA case.

 

[garybob]

TH just isn't in post legged "steer bulls" it is everywhere. Some of the most respected commercial breeders in the nation have knowingly or unknowingly used carrier genetics. Go look at a pasture of Improver 57 daughters and tell me that we need to get rid of all carrier cows or that they have no place in the industry. There are numerous THC cows that can have a tremendous commercial impact through their THF offspring. Test all of her calves and if they are THC cut the bull calves and keep the heifers that will improve your herd. If they are THF the sky is the limit. There is a fine line that can be walked with this whole genetic defect situation. IMO those who are able to get the positive traits from carrier lines in a none carrier animal will be ahead in the long run. One of the happiest days of my life was finding out that our Dream Girl donor was THF. However if she was THC it wouldn't have made her any less of a cow in our eyes because 50% of her calves would still be THF. We have several pregnancies coming out of her and Eagle 148 this spring. We feel this is an outstanding mating, and even if she would have been THC there would be at least one THF son that could do the breed a world of good. My biggest frustration with PHA and TH is the perception that it only occurs in show cattle but that couldn't be farther from the truth.

DL, I'm not going to watch your video(I can't even watch doctor shows on tv) but thank you for posting it. I think it is important to educate people on what can happen when carriers are mated to carriers. We have never had a TH or PHA calf but just the thought of what could happen is enough to prevent me from mating carriers. IMO most people who bred carriers to carrier don't think defective calves can  be that bad but hopefully now people will realize what a gruesome result is possible.

ITK,

I respectfully disagree. If you care to look closer, you'd see, BY AND LARGE, within the American Shorthorn Association's "North American Breeding Population" ( our fellow Canadians are in this mess, too) the "Genetic Defect" situation IS associated with Clubby Bulls. Let's look at why I believe this. Hear me out.

Back in the heyday of Continental Domination, you couldn't sell ANY Performance-tested Yearling Bull of ANY "British" Breed ( Except South Devons). Not even Angus. To save our butts, We, as a Breed, turned inward, and "did our own thing".

About this time, the Jackpot Show was evolving from a teaching tool for Agricultural Youth, and had begun to transform into a Varsity Sport, especially in the "Western" and "Corn Belt" States. Some Breeds' only salvation was this new, "Niche Market". Hence, you could sell Shorthorn Steers as "Project Calves" for a slight premium over the scale ( provided they had the right physical make-up), when, I'll say it again, A Producer, no matter how good their Shorthorns were, would get their "hat" handed to Them (like an unlubricated Scour Bolus) each (and every) time He or She marketed said calf crop through the local feeder calf auction.


Also, about tis time, the "80's" and its Financial Fiasco (not just in Agriculture) really changed the Midwest, unfortuneately, forever. Many pastures were plowed under when neighbors bought neighbors' farms after the bank stepped in. Gone,along with these Families ,were the Herds of environmentally-adapted Cows who ate frozen Corn Stalks (NOT STARCH) all winter long ( without supplementation and/or shelter--not even a windbreak), then spent the summer grazing weeds  and unimproved, native grasses,on ground "not good enough to Farm", while raising calves that set the "standards" for Marbling, flavor, and Tenderness. I believe, for the most part, that calves produced in tis scenario were what most Americans would associate with "Midwestern Beef". My Uncle was a Trucker, and as a boy, I'd ride with Him up to St. Louis and Chicago, or other "quick jaunts" through the Heartland. Each year, I'd notice, as We drove through the same parts of the Midwest, Livestock and fences were disappearing--FAST.

Back to Shorthorns. If you'll look at the lineage of most "carriers" you'll see 2 common Ancestors--Deerpark Improver and Stinger."Irish on a Maine".  In a nutshell, the basic (successful) recipefor producing show-steers. That supports my belief that "steer sires" ARE mostly responsible for this Crap.Well, actually, the People who continue to breed them are resonsible, No Offense.

Now that We know Who the Carriers are, I believe, We already have enough "Clean" offspring to perpetuate their beneficial DNA.

Yes, I like ol' "Red 57th"'s daughters. I like "Darth Vader"  (IDS Improver 2K)Cattle even better.

I haven't had a single TH calf, yet. Others on here have. The first time I do have one, and, if deliberate omission of the facts contributes to this occurrance, I will show Y'uns just exactly WHY the Civil War took so long for Y'all's ancestors to win.

GB

 

[itk]

One of the first confirmed THC bulls was ARSULU Ote. He is a Otis son that was owned by Bob Miller. I don't know if you have ever met Bob before or not but he is one of the most outspoken promoters of shorthorn cattle in the commercial sector. Marty Loving also used a Otis son for a long time that they don't know the TH status of but he is still using sons. Harold Good had Woodland Coach who is a 57 son. Now I admit that all of these bulls were purchased and used before a TH test was developed however if TH is correlated to a clubby look these bulls never would have got used at these operations. TH is most prevalent in the show sector of the breed  but Improver 57 is in so many pedigrees that it is hard to just limit the occurance of this defect to one sector.

 

[garybob]

One of the first confirmed THC bulls was ARSULU Ote. He is a Otis son that was owned by Bob Miller. I don't know if you have ever met Bob before or not but he is one of the most outspoken promoters of shorthorn cattle in the commercial sector. Marty Loving also used a Otis son for a long time that they don't know the TH status of but he is still using sons. Harold Good had Woodland Coach who is a 57 son. Now I admit that all of these bulls were purchased and used before a TH test was developed however if TH is correlated to a clubby look these bulls never would have got used at these operations. TH is most prevalent in the show sector of the breed  but Improver 57 is in so many pedigrees that it is hard to just limit the occurance of this defect to one sector.

ITK,

I never said Performance-oriented Shorthorns couldn't (or don't) carry the Defective Gene. Not at any time. I have said that these show-cattle-producing lines have much greater potential for being carriers.

The biggest point I'm trying to make is, Dr. Beever's test isn't being used for its intended purpose.

That being said, Does anyone know the "status" of "Darth Vader", officially known as IDS Improver 2K? My best Cow Family traces back to him. I'd like to use some of him directly, but the TH thing has me reserved.

GB

GB

 

[Ruebush Shorthorns]

Does anyone know the PHA status for 3W POayoff or Of Double Down.  I have a PHA carrier Bull and am trting to eliminate problems thanks.

 

[aj]

Clubby is a pretty broad term. I don't think gizmo is clubby. He is smaller boned and practical. Is anything that is not hard keeping clubby. 80% of shorthorn cows are hard keepers especially the showring type. I'm not sure that clean cattle from th carriers are any good. I have heard they have to be th carriers to have "the look" straight on back legs and very hairy. The cattle that are th free nobodie likes. I liked the looks of the coach bull as he was moderate but he was a double bred improver so I figured he may have been a carrier. Although I don't remember him having alot of hair. I am always trying to learn to be Nobody's fool. I don't think the old 3w payoff bull has a pedigree problem with pha. I don't think he goes to paramount or stinger(on paper anyway.

 

[DL]

Does anyone know the PHA status for 3W POayoff or Of Double Down.  I have a PHA carrier Bull and am trting to eliminate problems thanks.

Last I knew (a while ago) Double Down had not been tested - but it was long ago - call the breeder?
Don't see anything in the pedigree of 3W PAYOFF 8023 to think he is a PHA carrier - but there are some empty spaces. The bull was born in 88 and Stinger in 85.

dori - the abs list is sooo little, wish someone had a complete list

 

[Show Heifer]

Are you saying TH negative cattle aren't any good?  Or are you saying THF cattle from THC are no good? And what would be the difference? Ali, Witch Doctor, Hard Core, Strictly Business, Money Man, Chill Factor, Habanero, Hannibal, Dr.Who, WMW, Bold Statement, Alias, Taz, Kadabra, Full flush, Fore Play, etc, etc. are just some of the bulls that are free. I was just curious as to what you think of these bulls? I'm not saying I would use these bulls, but they are confirmed TH/PHA free.  Or did I misunderstand your whole post??? :-\

 

[Telos]

From personal observation and by talking to a number of breeders and herdsman, on the average within individual herd populations, TH and PHA carrier cattle have more of a showring appeal. TH comes with more hair and perhaps other physical characteristics associated with showring appeal. PHA carriers can have  more overall dimension and perhaps some down sizing. Again, this is on the average.

Someone mentioned, we need to have a different mind set. Until we all get on the same page regarding these defects, this will continue being a very slow process to reach the goal of elimination. It would probably be in everyones interest if our breed associations get tough and stay tough to help get these defects out of our herds. It does not make economic sense to make this a chronic problem.

... At the same time, we are not being realistic in thinking that everyone is going to get on the same page. TH is more popular and more desirable then it ever has been. Show steer producers know the benefits that come with this gene. It helps produce winning steers which fetch more dollars. The dynamics of PHA are perhaps a little different, but buyers continue to spend good money to have a competitive show heifer.

Did the showring evolve into being the devil's advocate? Until we decide to have a different mind set, this will continue being a complex problem with no simple solutions.

 

[Show Dad]

From some of my earliest post on this board I have screamed that most judges today do not have the best interest of the cattle industry in mind when judging cattle. This PHA & TH problem is just another example. So part of the solution, IMO, is to educate the judges so they move away from the carrier look to something more productive (and humane).

However, there are many youngsters or breeders that are new to the cattle industry  in this business that are retaining the animals they show and breeding them.  Many times these youngsters (or New to the Business) are truly uninformed not through anything but inexperience and tend to use the bull(s) that are most poplular in the business at that time.  These are the breeders that are going to get in severe trouble and may even quite a breed or the industry altogether if they have a PHA wreck.  It takes all the fun out of breeding livestock when you lose a baby regardless of species especially under the horrific circumstances of a PHA case.

And this isn't the only problem these new and uninformed breeders face. Supreme Champion Breeding Female of a statewide show a neighbor had died giving birth to an 80 lbs dead calf. Vet told me she had the smallest pelvic area he had ever seen. Now the death could have been avoided but this newbie thought he had one that should be a problem because he had the ribbon to prove it. Vet said he told him that judge had probably never calved any cattle since what he should have told you was she was only good for slaughter.

 

[Telos]

SD, even though there is perhaps a "carrier look", it probably falls within a framework of many different phenotypes. I think this "look" would be impossible to pinpoint and therefore difficult for judges to be objective. Testing seems to be the only avenue for successfully eliminating this out of our populations.

Will there come a time when we DNA test show steers for these genes in order to disqualify them for a show? Should we? What about breeding heifers?

 

[showsteerdlux]

I think on females we should test, but maybe not disqualify them but certainly either put them in a market heifer class or give the judge the results with instructions on the positive animals. As far as steers go, it would be nice to know which winners are positive but I don't think that we should ban carrier cattle from market shows since they will be slaughtered anyways. We have to start somewhere though or we as an Industry are going to have some large problems on our hands that we aren't going to know what to do with.

 

[Jill]

From some of my earliest post on this board I have screamed that most judges today do not have the best interest of the cattle industry in mind when judging cattle. This PHA & TH problem is just another example. So part of the solution, IMO, is to educate the judges so they move away from the carrier look to something more productive (and humane).

However, there are many youngsters or breeders that are new to the cattle industry  in this business that are retaining the animals they show and breeding them.  Many times these youngsters (or New to the Business) are truly uninformed not through anything but inexperience and tend to use the bull(s) that are most poplular in the business at that time.  These are the breeders that are going to get in severe trouble and may even quite a breed or the industry altogether if they have a PHA wreck.  It takes all the fun out of breeding livestock when you lose a baby regardless of species especially under the horrific circumstances of a PHA case.

And this isn't the only problem these new and uninformed breeders face. Supreme Champion Breeding Female of a statewide show a neighbor had died giving birth to an 80 lbs dead calf. Vet told me she had the smallest pelvic area he had ever seen. Now the death could have been avoided but this newbie thought he had one that should be a problem because he had the ribbon to prove it. Vet said he told him that judge had probably never calved any cattle since what he should have told you was she was only good for slaughter.

There is not a judge in this country that can pick out pelvic area, without a pelvic exam it is nothing but a guess.  I have seen huge cattle with calving problems and I have 5-6 frame cattle that pop out 100 pounder ever year.  You are asking way too much out of judges, they are not God, they don't have esp, they evaluate live cattle and give an opinon, if you could pick out which ones were PHA, TH we wouldn't need a test.  I can tell you no one I have ever met could go through my herd and  tell me which ones have PHA/TH and who has a small pelvic area, I couldn't have guessed it.

 

[aj]

I don't think you can look at mature cows and tell on th status. A grandma will look like a grandma. But young calves can show the look. Hair, straight legs and the look. There is a phenotype difference. Why would people use the th carrier bull instead of clean ones? Th carrier's have the look. THF cattle won't sire the look. Don't get me wrong...I have a moral problem with using thc and pha c's but it is what it is to the showring industry. I think birth weights are a similar thing. I'm not sure you can win a show without having a 100 plus birth weight calf. That is why the Shorthorn breed is battling big bwt's. I have heard big bwt's kill more calves and cows then th defects but dang why do we mess the problems. It is apparently about the look or the pounds per day of age or whatever. Profit in some ways in the commercial industry is based on pounds weaned per cow exposed. This includes fertility bwts etc etc. But the showring is about the look. If you can sell a show winner for 20,000 dollars bwts go out the window. Then people wonder why the commercial industry doesn't nessecarily like showring genetics.