What a crock of shinola

[buymorebulls]

Brandonm22:

A lot of the cattle business can be about "guessing" if you want it to be. We prefer to take the approach of "calculated risk". EPD's are a way to quantify our risks. AND, as the accuracy goes up on the EPD, the level of risk goes down.

In this case, we would like to know what size females the Red House bull might make.

I know with a high level of confidence (0.91 accuracy) his maternal grandsire (RRH Mr Felt 3008) makes daughters that are Top 1% (BIG!) of the Aussie population for mature weight. Anecdotally, the dam of Red House would appear to be around a 1600 pound female (she is a super looking cow, no matter the breed.) The sire/maternal great grand sire is 774. We don't have any EPD's on him for mature size. This increases our risk level. Since 774 carries above breed average growth, we can guess/bet that he'll sire above breed average mature size.

I can make a "calculated guess", with a some accuracy, that Red House will make bigger than breed average to upper percentile daughters for mature weight. Until he proves otherwise with individual data, that is where he is pegged. Population genetics says he'll probably fall into his expected outcome.

The growth curve on the 774 cattle is more appropriate and not extended like a lot of Herefords. If the double shot of that in the pedigree of Red House makes his daughters less than breed average for mature daughter weight and he holds up the high WW/YW EPD's, then he'll be very fun to use and use hard.

Until the, use him to prove him. When he's proven, and you still like him, then breed every cow to him.

[JHH]

But we overlook bulls like the Day 943 bull who doesnt have good numbers but looks appealling to the eye.

Do we do this out of habit or something else.JHH

[fargus]

But we overlook bulls like the Day 943 bull who doesnt have good numbers but looks appealling to the eye.

Do we do this out of habit or something else.JHH

I think everybody looks for the "complete package." I know I don't like to settle much myself. With the amount of choice out there it isn't that tough to find phenotypic excellence with average to above average numbers in the categories you are trying to maintain or improve. JMO.

[Brandonm22]

But we overlook bulls like the Day 943 bull who doesnt have good numbers but looks appealling to the eye.

Do we do this out of habit or something else.JHH

IF you have been breeding for numbers for years you don't want to go backwards and give up all that work. The truth is we want it all: easy keeping cows we don't have too heavily supplement, bulls that we can brag about to our buddies, breed leading EPD and performance data, birthweights so low that a 620 lb Longhorn heifer can lay down and have her first calf unassisted, weaning weights that make the Charolais breeder down the road green with envy, heifers that win the state fair, and fast growing super efficient market steers who hang a high choice/prime carcass yield grade one carcass so tender you can eat the steaks with a spoon.

[WichitaLineMan]

IF you have been breeding for numbers for years you don't want to go backwards and give up all that work. The truth is we want it all: easy keeping cows we don't have too heavily supplement, bulls that we can brag about to our buddies, breed leading EPD and performance data, birthweights so low that a 620 lb Longhorn heifer can lay down and have her first calf unassisted, weaning weights that make the Charolais breeder down the road green with envy, heifers that win the state fair, and fast growing super efficient market steers who hang a high choice/prime carcass yield grade one carcass so tender you can eat the steaks with a spoon.

Yeah and that's what's wrong with the beef industry. The fable that "You can have it ALL". Most other industries naturally moved towards specialization but beef breeders are still stuck believing in the Santa Claus of "Having it ALL".

[fargus]

I think you can have it all. Just not with one breed.

[JHH]

But we overlook bulls like the Day 943 bull who doesnt have good numbers but looks appealling to the eye.

Do we do this out of habit or something else.JHH

IF you have been breeding for numbers for years you don't want to go backwards and give up all that work. The truth is we want it all: easy keeping cows we don't have too heavily supplement, bulls that we can brag about to our buddies, breed leading EPD and performance data, birthweights so low that a 620 lb Longhorn heifer can lay down and have her first calf unassisted, weaning weights that make the Charolais breeder down the road green with envy, heifers that win the state fair, and fast growing super efficient market steers who hang a high choice/prime carcass yield grade one carcass so tender you can eat the steaks with a spoon.

He may HAVE IT ALL. (I doubt it) But the registered users WONT USE HIM. Because of the TPR and the people who do report and those who dont report the numbers stink. I dont think that Richard Day would be using cattle that dont produce. I will see soon. The other reason that he wont be used much is he is horned. I think if he breeds true he will bennifit most herds. Moderate frame meat wagons that can also have daughters that milk.

Isnt it going to be hard to get a great breeding bull in all catagories that breeds true. I dont think we can do this within a breed. You are trying to turn a easy doing hereford into something they are not.

I believe what you want is a crossbred not a purebred.

Why do we want more when average is good enough?

[Brandonm22]

He may HAVE IT ALL. (I doubt it) But the registered users WONT USE HIM. Because of the TPR and the people who do report and those who dont report the numbers stink. I dont think that Richard Day would be using cattle that dont produce. I will see soon. The other reason that he wont be used much is he is horned. I think if he breeds true he will bennifit most herds. Moderate frame meat wagons that can also have daughters that milk.

Isnt it going to be hard to get a great breeding bull in all catagories that breeds true. I dont think we can do this within a breed. You are trying to turn a easy doing hereford into something they are not.

I believe what you want is a crossbred not a purebred.

Why do we want more when average is good enough?

I think I have always advocated a moderate framed easy fleshing bomb proof maternal line (sort of like the best of the Victor cattle that were all over the place in the 80s) crossed to a framy, growthy, terminal sire line. Too date, the industry has rejected that model. We expect a Hereford or an Angus to tip the scales at weaning right with a Charolais or a Simmental. As I posted earlier, MARC is reporting NO DIFFERENCE in cow size between the four breeds. Gelbviehs are more moderate than Anguses. I don't know why weaning weight EPD keeps increasing. Long ago, it went from being the most important EPD too just about insignificant in real world production. I was getting 600++ pound weaning weights on fescue/sericea in the 90s from Hereford and Angus bulls whose growth EPDs seem positively inferior to the average of this year's calf crop. You get 30 lbs more weaning weight today; but have 400 lb heavier cows to do it. THAT trade never made any sense too me.