OP
OP
ALACOWMAN, you crack me up!
Angus $EN
- Thread starter Chuckie
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
animalsci2011
Active member
Honestly the Association can't explain it to you either. And they will not tell you how its calculated either. I talk to professors daily that worked closely with them to develop some of those indexes and thats the one that is ever changing and no one I know can figure out who came up with it. SO in all truth don't worry about it the new averages were released today and the average bull and heifer calves are at -5.0 or close so its going to only get more negative as times goes on. So when breeding throw it out and look at the bigger picture. Breed animals that will compliment each other, honestly I go overboard in this case. I bred a group of 9 cows/heifers this year to 8 different bulls. Will it help me probably not but I will darn sure be able to tell which bulls I like best. And it keeps my genetic base up so if I do keep bulls later down the road I shouldn't run into as much inbreeding. All angus are inbred anyways so that probably doesn't make much difference either. From you neighborhood animal scientist here. Have a wonderful day.
OP
OP
I do appreciate everyone throwing their two cents worth in on this topic.
DOC HARRIS
Well-known member
robert":hi6zmd4f said:
robert-
How well described you have pin-pointed these ("# Blather") Values! The rhetoric describing the #Values sounds very impressive and imaginative, but, In My Opinion, in 'down-to-earth' realities they are 'pie-in-the-sky' predictors which do not allow a breeder to anchor his mating protocols in a hard and fast manner in order to be able to depend on future results in produced progeny. A large framed, mature cow with high lactating energy requirements will demand higher feed energy expenses than one which is a smaller framed below average milking dam. This results in giving a false impression of the actual "beef-producing" benefits of the female to the producer at the end of the fiscal year! The costs are greater to feed hay, grain, pasture, grass, supplements, nutrients of all manner to larger pregnant or lactating cows with calves than to smaller cows . The energy requirements and costs vary exponentially with mature cow size. Therefore, the Cow Energy Value ($EN), expressed in dollar savings per cow per year, is transmitted in dollar savings differences to daughters of sires. The lower feed energy expenses are, the higher ($EN) Value is expressed! Very confusing to a great number of producers, and, also in my opinion, the more difficult it is to focus on the six or seven more important Multiple Trait factors (EPD's. Phenotype and Functional characteristics) in making final mating decisions in Cow/Calf operations.
In consideration of a Commercial or Feedlot protocol, the antagonistic factors existing between seedstock production and feedlot production surrounding mating selections are well documented, and again points out the importance and necessity of understanding ALL of the regimen requirements for a successful BU$INE$$ venture. A producer can attempt to focus on so many different numbers, per se, that he loses his faith, confidence and belief in the details that are necessary for success! This is an example of the 800 pound Gorilla in the living room which provokes the on-going arguments regarding ". . . which beef BREED is 'BEST'. . . " - whatever THAT means.
I imagine that a lot of the readers of this thread are not old enough to remember the old "Jack Benny" Radio Show routines wherein Jack's butler, Rochester, would give Jack so many examples, facts, details and extraneous and needless answers to a question and overtalk Jack to the point that Jack would finally yell WAIT A MINUTE!!! Everybody listening (on the Radio) knew what was coming, and waited for the punch line. It was really funny! I feel the same way about the fact that we are getting SO-O many EPD's that we just HAVE to consider that I want to say "WAIT A MINUTE!!! It is time that we focus on the few really important traits and characteristics and BALANCE them with focused intensity!
DOC HARRIS
love some cajun food.. like Foxworthy said.. if theres a ditch in your front yard in Louisiana.. you aint going hungry
Foxworthy is married to a Louisiana gal, he should know. Hahaha
You should see the mudbug pond I'm scratching out on my place, the wife is very excited.
Foxworthy is married to a Louisiana gal, he should know. Hahaha
You should see the mudbug pond I'm scratching out on my place, the wife is very excited.
A producer can attempt to focus on so many different numbers, per se, that he loses his faith, confidence and belief in the details that are necessary for success! This is an example of the 800 pound Gorilla in the living room which provokes the on-going arguments regarding ". . . which beef BREED is 'BEST'. . . " - whatever THAT means.
IDOC HARRIS[/quote]
Thanks for pointing that out Doc, because very few people I talk to put any faith in those numbers at all. (myself included)
The data collection method is fatally flawed and would be dismissed out of hand if submitted as a dissertation. It would be a lttle easier to believe if there were zone averages similar to those you see on nursery plants. It would be a lot easier to believe if the data submitted was on every single progeny instead of the best 10% that are registered. The data misleads individuals into thinking they can breed pedigrees and numbers from a computer keyboard and be successful financially and genetically. My eyes start to roll in my head when I hear someone breathlessly whispering with glazed over eyes about the epd numbers adding up...
There is no substitute for driving around, looking at herds, talking to people, and learning from people with real names instead of silly avatars. I guarantee you will learn a lot more visiting a group of calves that were just weaned off the teat than you will poring over lists of epd's like a smug monk studying scripture in an Abbey. But heck, who am I to blow the train whistle and let people off the "You Gotta Do___________________ Because Everybody Says So" train that has left the tracks...
IDOC HARRIS[/quote]
Thanks for pointing that out Doc, because very few people I talk to put any faith in those numbers at all. (myself included)
The data collection method is fatally flawed and would be dismissed out of hand if submitted as a dissertation. It would be a lttle easier to believe if there were zone averages similar to those you see on nursery plants. It would be a lot easier to believe if the data submitted was on every single progeny instead of the best 10% that are registered. The data misleads individuals into thinking they can breed pedigrees and numbers from a computer keyboard and be successful financially and genetically. My eyes start to roll in my head when I hear someone breathlessly whispering with glazed over eyes about the epd numbers adding up...
There is no substitute for driving around, looking at herds, talking to people, and learning from people with real names instead of silly avatars. I guarantee you will learn a lot more visiting a group of calves that were just weaned off the teat than you will poring over lists of epd's like a smug monk studying scripture in an Abbey. But heck, who am I to blow the train whistle and let people off the "You Gotta Do___________________ Because Everybody Says So" train that has left the tracks...
ALACOWMAN
Well-known member
yall work off the ''dont ask- dont tell''' policy ... dont ask, what it is your eating. and i wont tell you ..... now im craving some turtle gumbo :cowboy:JWBrahman":igdz3epy said:
JWBrahman phenotype, pedigree and a few Epds have to factor in for me. I have a few questions about your post. Do you not look at any EPDs on Brahman cattle? when you say only the progeny on the top 10% is submitted is that on Brahman? or are you saying that only 10% turn in the data. In Angus if you turn it in its calculated not only the top 10%. I agree a 100% it should be by zones and if your doing numbers you should understand the difference. im just trying to understand what your saying there.
As far as looking at cattle I agree you should look at them for sure but be careful some of those guys with a name will feed you a long line of BS that's there game.
As far as looking at cattle I agree you should look at them for sure but be careful some of those guys with a name will feed you a long line of BS that's there game.
ALACOWMAN
Well-known member
Stocker Steve
Well-known member
It is hard to find - $EN bulls in most catalogs, but I did AI my heifers to a - $EN bull last year. The calves looked small in the fall, but the repalacement heifers came on during the spring and summer. They are still a little below average in size and I hope they will make efficient cows.
$en was brought in to throw a bone to the low input crowd who were being increasingly alienated by the never ending numbers chase and yet also get them on the program with a" look at me, I've got big numbers too!" Deal.
Stocker Steve
Well-known member
robert":pgmft7ok said:
Not much of a bone.
Makes a guy look again at Herf semen.
Interesting BA thing is looking at the OCC bulls $EN numbers.
Robert I think you need to send the AAA a letter you have the definition for +$EN.
No growth + small mature weight + no milk = high $en does that look like a recipe for success?
there are exceptions but from what I see that sums it up pretty good.
No growth + small mature weight + no milk = high $en does that look like a recipe for success?
there are exceptions but from what I see that sums it up pretty good.
OP
OP
Great article ALACOWMAN! Makes it more understandable. Thanks for digging that one up.
ALACOWMAN
Well-known member
so many opinions on it, i thought i better go to ground zero on it and lookChuckie":rpk9ilwp said:
bse":12flzl0z said:
Sorry for the delay BSE, turning an old basketball court into fine furniture takes forever.
Of course I look at the pedigree, and feel that you get a far better analysis of a pedigree by looking at the actual sire, mothers, sisters, brothers in the herd than by clicking links on a web page. Of course I look at birth weights, weaning weights, and yearling weights; only I prefer to look at the calves when they are born, when they are weaned, and when they hit a year in age. I can form my own conclusions based upon the genotype in the environment far more effectively than the poorly paid farm hands who do most of the grunt work on large registered herds. Carcass data is also something that holds a lot of interest for me as well because it can be formulated independently of the breeder.
Just for future reference, phenotype and pedigree are fairly interchangeable terms. Phenotype= genotype plus the environment. You are only getting a true idea of phenotype by observing the genotype in the environment.
The 10% figure I arrived at by the old rule of thumb that you should only register the top ten percent of a group of calves in a registered herd. The figure is probably closer to 25%, but nobody really knows exactly how many registered bulls are used to cross breed or used strictly for commercial cattle. I tend to avoid breeders who register every last animal that is born on their farm. I was not specifying Brahman or any other breed. If every last dink was registered and analyzed in every breed the EPD's would be different.
As for the old farts at the feed store crowd...trust me when I tell you I take everything they say with a huge amount of skepticism. However, the old guys who want you to become a repeat customer usually cannot do enough to help you. When I go see a herd I am looking from top to bottom. Usually I do my evaluations out loud, commenting on toplines, hips, shoulder, pigment, primary sexual characteristics, etc. I understand what the shortcomings are in my own herd and do not wish to double up on them. I also have thousands of head of cattle from every possible breed combination outside my window for reference. Not trying to reinvent the wheel, just trying to do what other people do that has been successful.
So what I am saying is that The Angus Association was submitting its data for peer review it would be dismissed because the data cannot be independently verified and duplicated. It is an honor system masquerading as science for the purpose of marketing a product. My own analysis of demand and the cattle market is that the Black Angus thing has run out of steam and gone off the tracks. People are buying Hereford bulls of the teat down here while you cannot hardly give away anything bred to a low birth weight Black Angus bull. The clients I deal with feel that Angus is lower quality Wal Mart beef because Whole Foods is selling brand name Hereford and Beefmaster beef; but I am sure your market is different than mine.
You gotta raise Black Angus...
You gotta buy health insurance...
You gotta ____________....
See where I am going with this? :cowboy:
OP
OP
If we all take a trip on a Greyhound bus, we will make sure you and Rowdy have a seat beside each other.
