Big difference in birth weights in same cattle as you move north. Maternal calving ease becomes more important as you move north. I know of purebred breeders that had 10 lbs difference between spring and fall calves. And yes maternal calving ease does apply to mature cows.
Angus Expert Question #2
- Thread starter Air gator
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Son of Butch
Well-known member
I know the question was SAV bulls.
But the great thing about A.I. is you don't have to limit yourself to only SAV.
Not all below average calving ease bulls are created equal... In example S Chisum is a better sire than SAV Resource
S Chisum ced 2 acc .87 cem 12 mw -18 milk 22 $EN 20.47 ww 65 $W 86
Resource ced -3 acc .74 cem -8 mw -19 milk 27 $EN -14.54 ww 69 $W 66
Chisum's ced 2 but cem 12 = his width increases his daughter pelvic size allowing them a lifetime of easier calving
Resource's -8 cem worse than his -3 ced = his width is all show and no go... his daughter width is an illusion because
it doesn't aid them in calving compared to Chisum who actually improves his daughters to top 15% in calving ease
even though Chisum like Resource increases birth weights
Daughters of both are nearly identical in mw and size, but Chisum has a $35 EN advantage in efficiency.
Resource ww 69 vs $W 66 = 0.9565 calf ww to $w ratio = calf vigor
S Chisum ww 66 vs $W 86 = 1.30
Resource calves are below breed average in vigor and Chisum's are well above average in calf vigor
$W 66 vs 86
The Resource calves that live to weaning have a 3 lb advantage over Chisum calves at weaning
But because more Resource calves die before weaning than Chisum calves...
Chisum ends up with the $20 advantage in $W
To me, it all adds up to Chisum being the better buy for genetic advancement.
But the great thing about A.I. is you don't have to limit yourself to only SAV.
Not all below average calving ease bulls are created equal... In example S Chisum is a better sire than SAV Resource
S Chisum ced 2 acc .87 cem 12 mw -18 milk 22 $EN 20.47 ww 65 $W 86
Resource ced -3 acc .74 cem -8 mw -19 milk 27 $EN -14.54 ww 69 $W 66
Chisum's ced 2 but cem 12 = his width increases his daughter pelvic size allowing them a lifetime of easier calving
Resource's -8 cem worse than his -3 ced = his width is all show and no go... his daughter width is an illusion because
it doesn't aid them in calving compared to Chisum who actually improves his daughters to top 15% in calving ease
even though Chisum like Resource increases birth weights
Daughters of both are nearly identical in mw and size, but Chisum has a $35 EN advantage in efficiency.
Resource ww 69 vs $W 66 = 0.9565 calf ww to $w ratio = calf vigor
S Chisum ww 66 vs $W 86 = 1.30
Resource calves are below breed average in vigor and Chisum's are well above average in calf vigor
$W 66 vs 86
The Resource calves that live to weaning have a 3 lb advantage over Chisum calves at weaning
But because more Resource calves die before weaning than Chisum calves...
Chisum ends up with the $20 advantage in $W
To me, it all adds up to Chisum being the better buy for genetic advancement.
Son of Butch
Is your comment based on just numbers or have you actually had calves out of both Bulls?
Gizmom
Is your comment based on just numbers or have you actually had calves out of both Bulls?
Gizmom
Butch,
Here's the thing (and I have been hung up on this -8 CEM for a while). Gizmom and a another breeder on another site have first-hand experience calving out Resource daughters without any problem. It reminds me of a fullblood Simmental breeder many years ago who bred heifers to his new bull and sold them bred at his sale. The bull was a cow killer or should I say heifer killer. That's what I was expecting with a bull with a -8 CEM epd. I was thinking that there was report after report of problems calving out Resource daughters, but that's not what I'm hearing. It doesn't seem to be a widespread problem. So, what I'm thinking is that if you have a Resource daughter you could wait until they are a little older and/or use a really, really calving ease bull. I have looked at Renown and see that his epds are better for CEM and CED but worse for HP. Renown also has a Milk epd and $en that might put some people off. Now, Renown has been on back order and is a 6.0 frame bull and Resource is 5.5. Resource's calves are selling well. My sales rep says that buyers have epds that they want and then they come out and see the Resource calves and jump all over them. He says they have "Curb appeal". They look good when you see them. They have "the" look.
Here's the thing (and I have been hung up on this -8 CEM for a while). Gizmom and a another breeder on another site have first-hand experience calving out Resource daughters without any problem. It reminds me of a fullblood Simmental breeder many years ago who bred heifers to his new bull and sold them bred at his sale. The bull was a cow killer or should I say heifer killer. That's what I was expecting with a bull with a -8 CEM epd. I was thinking that there was report after report of problems calving out Resource daughters, but that's not what I'm hearing. It doesn't seem to be a widespread problem. So, what I'm thinking is that if you have a Resource daughter you could wait until they are a little older and/or use a really, really calving ease bull. I have looked at Renown and see that his epds are better for CEM and CED but worse for HP. Renown also has a Milk epd and $en that might put some people off. Now, Renown has been on back order and is a 6.0 frame bull and Resource is 5.5. Resource's calves are selling well. My sales rep says that buyers have epds that they want and then they come out and see the Resource calves and jump all over them. He says they have "Curb appeal". They look good when you see them. They have "the" look.
Butch
I just checked the actual records of the 5 Resource females we have three had their first calf this year two are bred heifers.
B51 reg# 18138241 Her actual birth weight was 72#, BW EPD 3.2 CED -2. Her first HC out of BC Certified 413 58# bred back AI first service to Coleman Charlo 0256.
B52 reg# 18138242 Her actual birth weight was 66#, BW EPD 2.5 CED +3. Her first BC out of BC Matrix 4132 68# bred back AI first service to SAV Density 4336.
B65 reg# 18138252 Her actual birth weight was 58#, BW EPD 06 CED +8. Her first HC out of Coleman EXT 6149 58# bred back AI first service to Coleman Charlo 0256.
I just don't see where you can call the bull a cow killer. I have just listed three of the five females we have in production the other two are heifers. I did not list any of the bull calves that we have had, and none of them had extreme birth weights.
gizmom
I just checked the actual records of the 5 Resource females we have three had their first calf this year two are bred heifers.
B51 reg# 18138241 Her actual birth weight was 72#, BW EPD 3.2 CED -2. Her first HC out of BC Certified 413 58# bred back AI first service to Coleman Charlo 0256.
B52 reg# 18138242 Her actual birth weight was 66#, BW EPD 2.5 CED +3. Her first BC out of BC Matrix 4132 68# bred back AI first service to SAV Density 4336.
B65 reg# 18138252 Her actual birth weight was 58#, BW EPD 06 CED +8. Her first HC out of Coleman EXT 6149 58# bred back AI first service to Coleman Charlo 0256.
I just don't see where you can call the bull a cow killer. I have just listed three of the five females we have in production the other two are heifers. I did not list any of the bull calves that we have had, and none of them had extreme birth weights.
gizmom
Son of Butch
Well-known member
I never called any Angus bull a cow killer. I call Resource a calf killer to call attention to his weakness.
My comments on both Chisum and Resource are based on statistical analysis. I have no calves from either.
I like the calves of both bulls a lot. But my analysis tells me Chisum is the wiser choice. (I really like him!)
I can't read German or Spanish, but I can read English and Numbers and when Resource's WW to $W ratio is out of
whack it tells me there is more to the story behind his good looking calves. That a higher than average number of
them aren't making it to weaning. Chisum's numbers tell me a different story, even though he's below breed average
ced and +2.8 bw... a higher than breed average number of them make it to weaning. When cattlemen talk about not
being afraid to use low ced and plus birth weight bulls. Chisum comes into my mind not Resource.
There are a lot worse choices than Resource (but there are also several better)
The Angus breed is large and diverse, but if everyone over uses bulls like Resource it just moves the breed closer
to becoming Simmentals. (Which I have called cow killers.)
Calving ease and fertility have been the top 2 economic $ advantages in making the Angus Breed #1
I'd hate to see them give up their natural advantage and regress to the others rather than leading the way.
CP made an excellent point about what happens when such bulls are used outside of a purebred breeders program.
I hope my postings are seen more as promoting bulls like Chisum rather than being viewed as bashing Resource.
My comments on both Chisum and Resource are based on statistical analysis. I have no calves from either.
I like the calves of both bulls a lot. But my analysis tells me Chisum is the wiser choice. (I really like him!)
I can't read German or Spanish, but I can read English and Numbers and when Resource's WW to $W ratio is out of
whack it tells me there is more to the story behind his good looking calves. That a higher than average number of
them aren't making it to weaning. Chisum's numbers tell me a different story, even though he's below breed average
ced and +2.8 bw... a higher than breed average number of them make it to weaning. When cattlemen talk about not
being afraid to use low ced and plus birth weight bulls. Chisum comes into my mind not Resource.
There are a lot worse choices than Resource (but there are also several better)
The Angus breed is large and diverse, but if everyone over uses bulls like Resource it just moves the breed closer
to becoming Simmentals. (Which I have called cow killers.)
Calving ease and fertility have been the top 2 economic $ advantages in making the Angus Breed #1
I'd hate to see them give up their natural advantage and regress to the others rather than leading the way.
CP made an excellent point about what happens when such bulls are used outside of a purebred breeders program.
I hope my postings are seen more as promoting bulls like Chisum rather than being viewed as bashing Resource.
cow pollinater
Well-known member
Butch didn't that I recall. In a thread about carrier cattle everyone was insisting that we slaughter entire herds for rubbing noses at the water trough with a cow that might carry something we don't have a test for yet. I brought up the -8 to point out that we have something potentially deadly right out in the open that nobody bats an eye at. Apparently that left a stick in bse's craw and he felt the need to hack it up in this thread.gizmom":38g3936b said:
I do believe that number will kill more cattle than the defects will once those genetics get out into the commercial herds as was my point when I said it the first time. In most herds if they have to pull a calf, that heifer gets killed. Might not be on the spot but it still kills her. I'm glad the bull has worked for you but you have a very small sample size and you're right there with them. Would you be willing to calve out a hundred commercial daughters bred to unproven hereford bulls where the only known genetics is that they were sired by him and you might not be able to get to them every day?
CP you and Butch are both making valid points. I don't nor would I use Resource on heifers. I know my herd and the production record of each cow, and that does make a huge difference. We have 15 or 16 more Resource calves coming this year, so I will be adding data in October. I love this type of discussion, Butch I didn't take your post as bashing Resource, however I didn't figure you had any on the ground. If you did I believe you would have a different opinion about him. I will be honest when I look through a sire catalog I am looking at genetics not numbers. I understand numbers are important but the genetics are what drive me. When I purchased my first Resource semen I was nervous because of the birth so just sampled him on a small number the first year all we got were bull calves. So we still don't have a large sample but have a good friend that feels the same as I do he is the real deal, so have seen a lot of calves born with no issues to both registered and commercial between three herds. I love these type discussions you may not change my mind but you bring up points I had not considered and that is never a bad thing.
Gizmom
Gizmom
CP
Nothing in my craw I've not used Resource nor will I as long as hes at Genex, but if he wasn't there id use him no worries. I asked her about your statement. You have lots of knowledge about these things and folks cling to what you say(which is a good thing) just for me and me only, on this one I'm gonna have to disagree. Time will tell.
I brought it up because Gizmon stated in this thread about Resource and who better to have an opinion about a bull than someone that has daughters in production, id take that way over someone just looking at numbers. A guy I know just put 5 on the ground and says there something to them, they have bone and legs to carry them not fine boned frail things.
Nothing in my craw I've not used Resource nor will I as long as hes at Genex, but if he wasn't there id use him no worries. I asked her about your statement. You have lots of knowledge about these things and folks cling to what you say(which is a good thing) just for me and me only, on this one I'm gonna have to disagree. Time will tell.
I brought it up because Gizmon stated in this thread about Resource and who better to have an opinion about a bull than someone that has daughters in production, id take that way over someone just looking at numbers. A guy I know just put 5 on the ground and says there something to them, they have bone and legs to carry them not fine boned frail things.
cow pollinater
Well-known member
My apologies for sounding a little extra snarky bse. I was chuckling when I wrote that this morning but I've been kind of grim lately.
Cherokee Canyon is the bull that this discussion reminds me of. He had a lot to offer so people used him but he had a MCE of -12 or something like that. My first set of registered cattle as a teenager had three daughters of his in them. I lost two of them and they were not big calves. It was a pretty disheartening start to my cattle career and at the time I didn't know any better. I don't care how good he was, he should have been cut.
Cherokee Canyon is the bull that this discussion reminds me of. He had a lot to offer so people used him but he had a MCE of -12 or something like that. My first set of registered cattle as a teenager had three daughters of his in them. I lost two of them and they were not big calves. It was a pretty disheartening start to my cattle career and at the time I didn't know any better. I don't care how good he was, he should have been cut.
cow pollinater
Well-known member
And, I wholeheartedly agree that we should be using genetics and not just stacking numbers but when there's something that blatant it warrants attention at the very least.
jscunn
Well-known member
If you look at sav resource's parents his parents both have CEM higher than -8 so either progeny or the dreaded genomics have moved his CEM down. I try to look at direction of EPDs and it looks like Resource's CEM is trending in the wrong direction. That being said he does have plenty to offer he just isnt perfect.
We may all be saying the same thing in around about way, Resource himself sure ain't going out on a group of commercial cattle, doubt many would AI much to him in the commercial world. But as a seedstock producer he can work for you.
I got the very first Resource sons out of 4 sire directories 17932714 ABS, 18250419 ST, 1825800 SS, 18179580 Accelerated. Now my question if acc was there which would you not use on a group of cows?
I got the very first Resource sons out of 4 sire directories 17932714 ABS, 18250419 ST, 1825800 SS, 18179580 Accelerated. Now my question if acc was there which would you not use on a group of cows?
First Question: What about SAV Renown? His CED and CEM is not as bad. His HP epd is worse though.
The bull at Accelerated doesn't seem to be available. The AAA# for Sav Drover with Select sires is 18258000. The ST genetics bull Sitz Reload looks pretty nice. It won't be long and there will be a Resource son out of a Connealy Confidence daughter or a Bismarck daughter and the CEM will improve. You may lose a little eye appeal.
The bull at Accelerated doesn't seem to be available. The AAA# for Sav Drover with Select sires is 18258000. The ST genetics bull Sitz Reload looks pretty nice. It won't be long and there will be a Resource son out of a Connealy Confidence daughter or a Bismarck daughter and the CEM will improve. You may lose a little eye appeal.
Jake
Well-known member
I really believe the CEM issues you see come through are shoulder shape induced not so much pelvic size. We have one resource daughter that came out of a heifer. (AI screw up) She was pulled but not a hard pull, was more of knowing what she was and nobody was going to take a risk. She is a big bodied, big boned, heavy fronted heifer. Doesn't seem to lack any skeletal dimension in her rear end but admittedly she hasn't been pelviced yet.
Resource has some benefits for sure. I believe he may be best used diluted to clean them up a little but they will flat out put some pounds on something without giving up all your fleshing ability and adding too much frame.
Resource has some benefits for sure. I believe he may be best used diluted to clean them up a little but they will flat out put some pounds on something without giving up all your fleshing ability and adding too much frame.
