J
JTM
Guest
Doc said:I've been submitted lots and lots of data for several years. Much more data than this study will give me. 13 calves in a group for over $2,000 cost? Who can afford that in the real world? I didn't even know anything about it until a few weeks ago and it's already at the deadline. The thought crossed my mind that I should put CF Star Bucks in there just for kicks and giggles. I sent an email to the participants saying that I think we should have had a committee to talk about which bulls would be best to objectively enter this test and have the ASA pay for the expense of the testing or do some fundraising for it. I also copied ASA staff. I have received zero replies...
Josh, I agree about knowing about it. I'm even further behind than you, I didn't find out about it until yesterday when I got my Shorthorn Insider email. It makes you wonder if they already had their bulls in place? Why wasn't it one of the headlines when you go to the ASA website instead of the BIF conference and some Jr stuff?
I'm with Lonnie in that I remember when Shorthorns were always at the top at MARC, but even then it seemed like the ASA preached the data to the choir more than getting out and preaching it to the masses.
The black hide deal is still real in our area. We use a Angus bull as cleanup on our heifers and then we put our black recips with one of our Shorthorn bulls after an egg has been put in and those black calves will always bring more than their contemporaries that are roan or red even if they are not any better.
[/quote]
oakview said:Unless you've been around a while, you may not know the ASA had a sire test over 30 years ago. I sent about 50 units of semen on my bull. I believe the cows were owned by Padlock Ranch, perhaps in Wyoming. The owners of the bull bought the steer calves at weaning and they were sent to a feedlot near Brule, Nebraska. We took a trip to the feedlot and were able to view all the calves. It was quite interesting, the sire groups included straight dual purpose, straight beef, and a mix of the two. We were provided all performance and carcass data. I know I've got the information somewhere and there were perhaps 20 or more bulls compared. I don't know what ever happened to the data from the ASA's standpoint. Shorthorns were also compared with numerous other breeds, up one side and down the other, at the USDA's meat animal research center about that time, perhaps a little later. Shorthorns compared very, very favorably with the other breeds in all facets of production, conception to carcass. My neighbor that had 100+ Hereford cows asked his field man why he shouldn't just turn a Shorthorn bull out with all his cows after seeing the data from MARC. The field man didn't have an answer. I don't know if this information was ever utilized to he fullest. I support the "new" sire test, I may even enter a bull next year.
On the down side, though, I've been told we're in the "Information Age" for over 40 years. We've got to have this, we've got to provide that, etc. We ultrasound our bulls and provide performance data at the beef expo and still the ones that sell highest are the "pretty ones." I'm not saying it's right, but the largest single source of bulls in our area is still the special cattle sale at the sale barn. Very little if any information is provided. Selling prices at the most recent sale were from 1,500 to about 3,000. The only common thread among the bulls is they're almost 100% black. As long as the black hided myth is perpetuated, black bulls are what's going to be most in demand. I don't know how many cattle men I've talked to admit they are missing something, but it's hard to argue when they think their calves are going to bring 15 cents a pound more at weaning, simply because they're black. We can provide all the proof we want, but until that changes, it's going to be hard to get a significant commercial market share. I hear things are a little different in Canada. I hope so.
Endless Meadows said:This is starting to get a little off the original topic but while we are on it. I think it is good to have the sire test started and hopefully it will get going within the breed. Before I get too critical, it is the first year and there is plenty of room to grow and adapt. Not everything can be perfect from the start.
On the down side it is fairly cost prohibitive, unless I misread something. $2000 to AI 20 cows. At 65% conception rate =13 calves. Even assuming 100% survivability and not putting a value on the semen, you would have $153.85 into each calf. You own nothing and get premiums for nothing but you do get data back. I understand that data is important and can be extremely valuable, but can the cost be justified?
Just wanted have this conversation in a new thread.JTM said:I've been submitted lots and lots of data for several years. Much more data than this study will give me. 13 calves in a group for over $2,000 cost? Who can afford that in the real world? I didn't even know anything about it until a few weeks ago and it's already at the deadline. The thought crossed my mind that I should put CF Star Bucks in there just for kicks and giggles. I sent an email to the participants saying that I think we should have had a committee to talk about which bulls would be best to objectively enter this test and have the ASA pay for the expense of the testing or do some fundraising for it. I also copied ASA staff. I have received zero replies...Duncraggan said:This sire test is something that the ASA is doing to help it's members. Unfortunately in this day and age, the 'user pays' principle is the norm and if you want information, you have to cough up for it!E3 Durhams said:No the cost can't be justified. Name one thing the Asa does to help its members? Nothing. I want to register my cattle, but not when it costs me money to do it and I get no benefit. It's time for the Asa to step up. Long past time actually.
You can spend years doing your own in-herd testing, or, you can pay your $2000 dollars and fast track your data collection and accuracy by joining the ASA sire test.
With beef prices declining, and inputs soaring, I think the days of buying a cheap bull with no data at the sale barn and still making a good profit are few.