Sits Angus and $M

Help Support CattleToday:

J+ Cattle

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
764
Reaction score
1,043
Location
North Texas

Thoughts?

I see a lot of posts about SAV bulls but not so many for SITZ bulls. When looking back at the bulls that I've used I see the SITZ name the most often somewhere in the pedigree. Maybe I just have different goals than others on the board.
 
SAV Resource is the only one I have used in recent years. The one bull calf I had was ok, but a bit of a pud and lightest weaning weight of the bull calves (dam's fault at play too). Two heifers kept for replacements did OK, but one bred back late after first calf and got shipped this fall. Can't say they have been all that great here, but maybe the remaining cow (second calf coming March 2022) will make it.
 
We have used different Sitz bulls in the past. The one I had high hopes for had an attitude problem so he wasn't around long. For our country we have to watch that cattle don't get too big. That's why we never used SAV cattle. I used to sell advertising to seedstock producers and I can tell you, Kelly Schaff is a very austute Angus breeder. I had a high respect for him because he was really on top of things.
 
@GoWyo have you used any SITZ bulls to have a comparison between the two?
I have 2 bulls and 3 heifer calves from the spring 2021 calf crop by Sitz Resilient. Bulls will be easy to sell. I think the heifers are going to be pretty good little rips. Have more calves on the way in 2022 by Resilient. They grow well here and the bulls look like bulls from about 2 months old. Have a few Square B True North on the way to provide an indirect comparison next year.
 
I haven't used any Sitz in the 12 years I've been using AI to breed my cows mainly because there has not been many in our semen catalogues however I have wanted to try some and I have just added 20 Sitz Stellars to my tank but won't get to put them in until next Sept/Oct. I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

Ken
 
What does Sitz offer over other breeders? Are there any results in fescue country?
 
What does Sitz offer over other breeders? Are there any results in fescue country?
I'm in fescue country and they've done fine here. I think the Sitz bulls are very hardy and hold up well compared to many other angus breeders. They do a good job toeing the line of performance and functionality... they may not give you the flashiest calves, but they'll breed every cow you got on time..
 
@faster horses my objections to SAV's operation are the enormous WW and YW they advertise so proudly. Any calf that tops 1000 lbs at 205 day WW didn't get there on native grass and mommas milk. They're just creating hype to sell bulls that won't work for me.
I agree. We sure try to stay away from YW EPD's of +100 or more. Steer calves were a by-product since we bred for great females. MODERATE females. It's getting hard to do when many, if not most, Angus AI sires mature weights are more than Simmental.
 
MODERATE females. It's getting hard to do when many, if not most, Angus AI sires mature weights are more than Simmental.
It seems people have many different ideas about what is moderate, I have my opinions, but please tell me your definition of moderate.
 
Years ago I bought a cow calf pair at an Angus dispersal. Cow was a first calf heifer by VDAR Lucy's Boy, her calf was by Sitz Traveller 8180. Intended to keep the calf for a bull, but he was hot as a firecracker by a year of age, and didn't want to put up with that.
More recently but still some years back Sitz Upward was real popular around here. Some people thought he was too big frame wise, and disposition of calves was said to be not too good.
I liked the idea of having larger framed commercial calves and purchased a grandson of Upward out of a Final Answer daughter. Most expensive bull I've bought and the most disappointing. I liked his temperament but he did have a habit of going over fences. Calves did not grow well.
 
Sitz Resilient is the first Sitz bull we have used here. If his EPDs stay about where they are he checks every box for us. Still 15 months out from seeing the first inkling of what kind of cows his daughters will make. Their penmates are by Hoover Dam, Ox Bow Ozzie, Mohnen Substantial and my own herd sires by Leachman Right Time and Gardens Wave. The comparisons are going to be interesting.
 
$M is the or one of the current fads for AAA chart toppers. I do not think that the index value alone indicates "moderate". If EPDs can be used as bumpers, guardrails or limiters, it seems that keying in on selecting moderation in growth and milk while holding the traits of feet, hair, CEM, DOC and HP to required minimums will get you to a moderate cow quicker and with more reliability of function. One of the last crazes/fads of AAA number chasers has been curvebenders. They are born early and do not stop growing as soon. Nothing new, but the best thing AAA could do to help folks who discern usefulness or moderation of their herd would be to publish a gestation length EPD with 283 being zero and all other being +/-. But that is too much common sense in the high brow world of AAA bigger and better. Curvebenders will reek their effects for generations to come.

I think often of the old AAA ad that was so effective and memorable: the angus cow and the elephant. Today, the elephant would need to be smaller than the cow to tell the efforts of bigger and better. Too bad.

What is amazing to me is that the "definition" of the index has a high cull/replacement rate. And if you run CED and MM up to the top there is going to be high $M but the overall function of the resultant cows can be frail and hard to get to bred back.

https://www.angus.org/nce/ValueIndexes
Maternal weaned calf value ($M) is the most maternally-focused selection index currently available to Angus members and commercial users of Angus genetics. $M, expressed in dollars per head, aims to predict profitability differences in progeny due to genetics from conception to weaning. $M is built off of a self-replacing herd model where commercial cattlemen replace 25% of their breeding females in the first generation and 20% in subsequent generations. Remaining cull females and all male progeny are sold as feeder calves.

$M places greater emphasis on the cost side of commercial cow-calf production than any tool available in the past. Increased selection pressure on $M aims to decrease overall mature cow size while maintaining weaning weights consistent with today's production. Under $M selection, less emphasis is placed on maternal milk, while heifer pregnancy and docility have an increased emphasis, and foot traits start to improve. The index finds cattle that are most profitable when producers receive no economic benefit for traits affecting post-weaning performance.

For example if Bull A has a $M of +75 and Bull B has a $M of +55 and both are mated to a comparable set of females, one would expect, on average, for Bull A's progeny to be $20 more profitable per head for the cow/calf producer.

EPDs directly influencing the index include: calving ease direct and maternal, weaning weight, maternal milk, heifer pregnancy, docility, mature weight as well as foot angle and claw set.
 
What is amazing to me is that the "definition" of the index has a high cull/replacement rate. And if you run CED and MM up to the top there is going to be high $M but the overall function of the resultant cows can be frail and hard to get to bred back.
I've read pieces on some seedstock producers in Prairie Farmer, amongst other publications, that tell how they sell all cows at 6 years old maximum to capture resale value of the cow and replace with the latest greatest genetics. Your observation would seem to fall in line with this philosophy. All they have to do is work for four years, probably stuffed full of feed to help make up for their shortcomings.
 
I've read pieces on some seedstock producers in Prairie Farmer, amongst other publications, that tell how they sell all cows at 6 years old maximum to capture resale value of the cow and replace with the latest greatest genetics. Your observation would seem to fall in line with this philosophy. All they have to do is work for four years, probably stuffed full of feed to help make up for their shortcomings.
There have been recent articles, I think in Progressive Cattleman, that debunk the extra value of quick turnover by choice. The quick turnover in the current angus population is likely due to bred in lack of function. Too little observations of fit and function and too much razzle dazzle and numbers. A blend is good as long as neither blind the other. Longevity of cattle is a true blessing as it not only verifies environmental fit but also hints of good fertility, sound structure, strong immune system...
 

Latest posts

Top