Beefmaster sale in Tenn

[Warren Allison]

Prices are unbelievable. Bull, heifers or bred cows...if they are homo for black and homo for polled, they bring their weight in gold! https://consoles-east.dvauction.com/events/216970/bidder?

 

[Travlr]

Prices are unbelievable. Cull, heifers or bred cows...if they are homo for black and homo for polled, they bring their weight in gold! https://consoles-east.dvauction.com/events/216970/bidder?

Then they really aren't Beefmaster... just like all the rest that have polluted their genetics.

 

[greybeard]

Then they really aren't Beefmaster... just like all the rest that have polluted their genetics.

absolutely true!!

Tom Lasater's 6 essentials don't include #&^%*N! hide color or polled. I am thankful when I was about 16 (1966) I was exposed to that awful disease for a short while and as a result developed a lifelong immunity to BHF. I've seen people rush headlong into that pit like crazed drug addicts for no reason other than seeking color.

 

[simme]

The old "polluted genetics" thing. But it seems that maybe the right kind of "pollution" can pay if it meets the demand of the marketplace. A person could decide that beefmasters and any other multi-breed cattle are "polluted" or at least originated from "polluted" genetics.

"Pollution" based on deception ain't right, but honest upfront sprinkles of genetics to meet market demands ain't no sin. Most people don't miss cattle dehorning either.

And some people even add beans to chili.

 

[Warren Allison]

Then they really aren't Beefmaster... just like all the rest that have polluted their genetics.

The sold some red, red & white, and black & white ones as well. Beef masters are supposed to be 1/2 Bra, 1/4 Hereford, and 1/4 Shorthorn. There are polled Brahmas and polled Herefords, so they could achieve the homo for polled without going outside these 3, but where did the black come from? Started seeing black BMs about the same time as black Herefords, so that couldn't be the sole source.

 

[Travlr]

The old "polluted genetics" thing. But it seems that maybe the right kind of "pollution" can pay if it meets the demand of the marketplace. A person could decide that beefmasters and any other multi-breed cattle are "polluted" or at least originated from "polluted" genetics.

"Pollution" based on deception ain't right, but honest upfront sprinkles of genetics to meet market demands ain't no sin. Most people don't miss cattle dehorning either.

And some people even add beans to chili.

The "market"... IS... the "deception". People unwilling to pay top dollar for top quality, simply because they aren't black. People breeding for black so they get top dollar... and forgetting quality entirely.

The entire gene pool is being reduced exponentially and cattle are less capable, less meaty, and less healthy, and people that aren't old enough to remember what kind of animals there were 50 years ago think everything is just fine. The only thing that I know of that has improved is feed conversion.

 

[simme]

The "market"... IS... the "deception". People unwilling to pay top dollar for top quality, simply because they aren't black. People breeding for black so they get top dollar... and forgetting quality entirely.

The entire gene pool is being reduced exponentially and cattle are less capable, less meaty, and less healthy, and people that aren't old enough to remember what kind of animals there were 50 years ago think everything is just fine. The only thing that I know of that has improved is feed conversion.

Only thing that has improved in 50 years is feed conversion? 50 years is 1974. What about weaning weights, yearling weights, carcass quality, calving ease, % of polled cattle, herd health and health in the feedlot, marbling, profit? Was the choice/select grade split better in 1974 or 2024?

 

[Brute 23]

Only thing that has improved in 50 years is feed conversion? 50 years is 1974. What about weaning weights, yearling weights, carcass quality, calving ease, % of polled cattle, herd health and health in the feedlot, marbling, profit? Was the choice/select grade split better in 1974 or 2024?

Some of those listed could be due to management practices and some are due to genetics across the industy. I don't that any of them are due to a black hide.

If the beef industry as a whole would have pushed meat quality and not one breed, none of this would be happening.

No producer says I need black cattle because they are better in my environment. They all tolerate it for the money.

 

[greybeard]

The entire gene pool is being reduced exponentially and cattle are less capable, less meaty, and less healthy, and people that aren't old enough to remember what kind of animals there were 50 years ago think everything is just fine.

You left out taste. Just like them hard, every one look exactly alike, same size, same color, tasteless tomatoes (almost) everyone has become accustomed to, the current public has no idea what beef used to taste like.

The old pit was Angus, the new pit is Wagyu, and I guess the next one foisted on the so very gullible public will be Corrientes.

 

[greybeard]

They all tolerate it for the money.

yep.

 

[Travlr]

Only thing that has improved in 50 years is feed conversion? 50 years is 1974. What about weaning weights, yearling weights, carcass quality, calving ease, % of polled cattle, herd health and health in the feedlot, marbling, profit? Was the choice/select grade split better in 1974 or 2024?

We're talking about averages... right? Not the outliers that everybody brags about... right? And healthier cattle? Not a bump in medical technology? Carcass quality as a function of grading, yield ratios, and dressing percentage? Calving ease as a function of bulls that throw tiny calves? Or as a function of cows that are capable of having normal sized calves? Polled? What the hell does that have to do with quality? Marbling? Again, outliers. Profit? In a world with double the population of consumers and a declining number of animals?

The average cow today would not compare well with the average between 1974 and 1990 when you compare meat to bone ratios or dressing percentages, or percentage of unassisted births in normal weight calves. I'd also suspect there are worse feet and more birth defects. It would be difficult to quantify completely. Of course we could both cherry pick examples of excellence today. I could example herds in the past that would make anyone today sit up and take notice.

Anyways... the point is moot. The past is dust in the wind and the genetic pool today is getting low.

 

[simme]

Some of those listed could be due to management practices and some are due to genetics across the industy. I don't that any of them are due to a black hide.

If the beef industry as a whole would have pushed meat quality and not one breed, none of this would be happening.

No producer says I need black cattle because they are better in my environment. They all tolerate it for the money.

Agree with management and genetics. I never mentioned Black. I was responding to the claim that the only improvement in cattle in 50 years is feed conversion. I don't think that is correct.

 

[Warren Allison]

absolutely true!!

Tom Lasater's 6 essentials don't include #&^%*N! hide color or polled. I am thankful when I was about 16 (1966) I was exposed to that awful disease for a short while and as a result developed a lifelong immunity to BHF. I've seen people rush headlong into that pit like crazed drug addicts for no reason other than seeking color.

View attachment 46097

1966? CAB didn't come along i til the 80's. but even before that, Angus were already the most popular cattle, by far. Best mommas., best milkers, and best carcasses. 60 years ago, if you toured Ga, or other southern states, you would find that Southern Baptists made up 80-85% of the population, and United Methodists made up 10-15%. Other denominations, Catholic, Jews, atheists, etc, combined were the other 5-10%. Same with beef cattle: 80-85% Angus, 10-15% Hereford, and 5-10 % "other". CAB and the other 38 certified Angus programs have not hurt the Angus breed at all, that I can see. Angus today are a much better, bigger, cattle than the ones my Grandaddy bought in 1963 to start his operation. Have other breeds lost some things in the effort to turn them black? I would agree that they have. And it was so stupid and not necessary. You could take the original red & white Simms that got down here in the late 60-s and early 70's....or the red Lims and Gelbs that got here in the 80's, and breed them to Angus, and get a polled,. black calf that would out-perform today's, black Simms, Lims and Gelbs in growth rates, performance in the feedlots, and on the table. It is the marbling characteristics of Angus that makes them the best beef...not their color.

Way before the CAB programs hit in the 80's. the continental breed associations of the US, had their breed up programs. that allowed their cattle to be crossed with other breeds, and once they were bred up to 7/8th or 15/16ths, they would say they were pure bloods or full bloods. And a lot of the cattle used in these breed up programs were Angus. Black being a dominant color, black would still show up in even 7/8ths animals. Prior to WWII, Charolais were predominantly red, and the dilute gene caused a lot of tans, too. Occassionally, a tan would be bred to a tan, and you got the double dilute whites. In the 1930's and 40's, a concerted effort was made to breed tan to tan to get the whites. And reds were bred to whites to get more tans. If the Charolais that arrived here in the 60's were red, or tan, and with the US association's breed up program, we would have already had black Charolais.

I do agree that this turning of the breeds black has probably costs these breeds to lose some of its genetic integrity. But to blame the most successful marketing campaign ever in the history of cattle is ludicrous. If anyone is to blame, it is the members of these associations that instituted the breed up programs. I think that in 30-40 years, all bos taurus breeds will be black, with veryt little to distinguish them form another. The composites are following suit, We have black beefmasters, and now black Brafords out sell the red, chocolate and tiger striped. That's what I bred those 12 Brahmas I bought to....a homo for black and polled black Hereford. I see more and more black Simbrahs for sale now, too. Haven't heard of a black Santa Gertrudis, yet, but their books are closed, so dunno how they'd introduce black.

 

[simme]

We're talking about averages... right? Not the outliers that everybody brags about... right? And healthier cattle? Not a bump in medical technology? Carcass quality as a function of grading, yield ratios, and dressing percentage? Calving ease as a function of bulls that throw tiny calves? Or as a function of cows that are capable of having normal sized calves? Polled? What the hell does that have to do with quality? Marbling? Again, outliers. Profit? In a world with double the population of consumers and a declining number of animals?

The average cow today would not compare well with the average between 1974 and 1990 when you compare meat to bone ratios or dressing percentages, or percentage of unassisted births in normal weight calves. I'd also suspect there are worse feet and more birth defects. It would be difficult to quantify completely. Of course we could both cherry pick examples of excellence today. I could example herds in the past that would make anyone today sit up and take notice.

Anyways... the point is moot. The past is dust in the wind and the genetic pool today is getting low.

Yes, averages of 1974 vs 2024. Carcass certainly includes grade. I think there were more select grade cattle in 1994 than now. I think that has improved.

What is wrong with calving ease? I think you are really making a connection to birth weight, not calving ease. They are related, but not a direct linear relationship. I think your issue is that very low birth weight can be associated with weaker calves that are not as vigorous as higher birth weight calves. I understand someone wanting some birth weight on the calves, but don't understand anyone wanting calving problems. Cows that calve easily are a good thing.

I never said that Polled calves are higher "quality". But believe that polled calves are more desirable than horned for most people, certainly more desirable in the feedlot. In most breeds, there is a higher % of polled than 50 years ago. I think that is an improvement for most.

Better marbling today than 50 years ago? Yes I think that is an improvement. That fits into Choice vs Select grade.

Percentage of unassisted births? I think people pull fewer calves today than in 1974. Birth defects - we had the drwafism issue back in the day. Genetic defects are not a new issue, but there are some new defects. No cherry picking, but responding to what seemed to be a claim that the only thing that has improved in 50 years is feed conversion. And I never mentioned black or attributed any of the improvements to color. Color has little to do with the issue of improvements. But may affect the economics.

 

[Travlr]

1966? CAB didn't come along i til the 80's. but even before that, Angus were already the most popular cattle, by far. Best mommas., best milkers, and best carcasses. 60 years ago, if you toured Ga, or other southern states, you would find that Southern Baptists made up 80-85% of the population, and United Methodists made up 10-15%. Other denominations, Catholic, Jews, atheists, etc, combined were the other 5-10%. Same with beef cattle: 80-85% Angus, 10-15% Hereford, and 5-10 % "other". CAB and the other 38 certified Angus programs have not hurt the Angus breed at all, that I can see. Angus today are a much better, bigger, cattle than the ones my Grandaddy bought in 1963 to start his operation. Have other breeds lost some things in the effort to turn them black? I would agree that they have. And it was so stupid and not necessary. You could take the original red & white Simms that got down here in the late 60-s and early 70's....or the red Lims and Gelbs that got here in the 80's, and breed them to Angus, and get a polled,. black calf that would out-perform today's, black Simms, Lims and Gelbs in growth rates, performance in the feedlots, and on the table. It is the marbling characteristics of Angus that makes them the best beef...not their color.

Way before the CAB programs hit in the 80's. the continental breed associations of the US, had their breed up programs. that allowed their cattle to be crossed with other breeds, and once they were bred up to 7/8th or 15/16ths, they would say they were pure bloods or full bloods. And a lot of the cattle used in these breed up programs were Angus. Black being a dominant color, black would still show up in even 7/8ths animals. Prior to WWII, Charolais were predominantly red, and the dilute gene caused a lot of tans, too. Occassionally, a tan would be bred to a tan, and you got the double dilute whites. In the 1930's and 40's, a concerted effort was made to breed tan to tan to get the whites. And reds were bred to whites to get more tans. If the Charolais that arrived here in the 60's were red, or tan, and with the US association's breed up program, we would have already had black Charolais.

I do agree that this turning of the breeds black has probably costs these breeds to lose some of its genetic integrity. But to blame the most successful marketing campaign ever in the history of cattle is ludicrous. If anyone is to blame, it is the members of these associations that instituted the breed up programs. I think that in 30-40 years, all bos taurus breeds will be black, with veryt little to distinguish them form another. The composites are following suit, We have black beefmasters, and now black Brafords out sell the red, chocolate and tiger striped. That's what I bred those 12 Brahmas I bought to....a homo for black and polled black Hereford. I see more and more black Simbrahs for sale now, too. Haven't heard of a black Santa Gertrudis, yet, but their books are closed, so dunno how they'd introduce black.

I would bet money that at least 80 percent of Angus are related withing five generations... and through multiple generations. And the gene pool is getting narrower as time goes on. AI and flushing cows has produced some damn fine animals, but continued use over time is putting everything on one side of the family tree, and only a few branches. And the Angus that are being used to put the black in other breeds are the same ones that are at the top of the Angus pyramid of top bulls. The top bulls produce the next tier of registered bulls through females that are likely related to the top bulls, and then those bulls produce the next tier of commercial bulls that sire more than half the beef in the country... and the percentage is growing.

We can agree that CAB has been the greatest marketing strategy ever devised... and has has some fantastic returns in the short term. But long term it's a very, very bad idea.

 

[Travlr]

Yes, averages of 1974 vs 2024. Carcass certainly includes grade. I think there were more select grade cattle in 1994 than now. I think that has improved.

What is wrong with calving ease? I think you are really making a connection to birth weight, not calving ease. They are related, but not a direct linear relationship. I think your issue is that very low birth weight can be associated with weaker calves that are not as vigorous as higher birth weight calves. I understand someone wanting some birth weight on the calves, but don't understand anyone wanting calving problems. Cows that calve easily are a good thing.

I never said that Polled calves are higher "quality". But believe that polled calves are more desirable than horned for most people, certainly more desirable in the feedlot. In most breeds, there is a higher % of polled than 50 years ago. I think that is an improvement for most.

Better marbling today than 50 years ago? Yes I think that is an improvement. That fits into Choice vs Select grade.

Percentage of unassisted births? I think people pull fewer calves today than in 1974. Birth defects - we had the drwafism issue back in the day. Genetic defects are not a new issue, but there are some new defects. No cherry picking, but responding to what seemed to be a claim that the only thing that has improved in 50 years is feed conversion. And I never mentioned black or attributed any of the improvements to color. Color has little to do with the issue of improvements. But may affect the economics.

I'm not going to comment on the entire statistical data, so I'll choose two of your points and respond to them.

Carcasses grade higher because they are fatter. Yield grades are worse. Feed sciences have developed and we are using a lot of "pre-digested" plant matter from processing, which does the same thing cooking does for human beings. Nutrient available feeds have changed the game. But... if you look at the carcasses they carry less muscle than they did and there is more trim per pound. A trade off. Less select grades for a reason.

When people select for CE bulls it's attractive to think it will solve all your problems. If you look at the bulls/steers of yesteryear compared to today's bulls/steers, the bulls of today look like the steers from decades ago. Feminine heads, light muscle front and rear, and finer bone. This kind of transformation affects the resulting replacement stock. The cows today have lost skeletal structure in their hips. Continued use of CE bulls don't weed out the cows with trouble calving normal sized calves, the natural widening of the hips during parturition, and those cows get put back into the gene pool. There's a cost to constant selection of CE bulls. I used them myself on first calf heifers, but then graduated to better bulls for later calves and the cows naturally developed calving ability or they were culled. But some people use CE bulls from birth to death of their cows and they use the heifers produced every generation to replace cows. Popular ideas... but nature doesn't give a damn about popularity.

 

[kenny thomas]

Angus were considered culls here in the 60's. Nobody wanted them. People would buy a dairy cross cow before they would an Angus.
Black cows are popular here now but lots of them still aren't Angus.

 

[Logan52]

Some interesting points being raised here. It is hard to beat nature.
Look at Thoroughbred horses. Continued breeding the best to the best can only go so far. Race times seem to plateau despite huge advances in nutrition and management. The animal itself is weaker and more prone to breakdown.

 

[Travlr]

Angus were considered culls here in the 60's. Nobody wanted them. People would buy a dairy cross cow before they would an Angus.
Black cows are popular here now but lots of them still aren't Angus.

I know in the mid '50s everything in Northern California, and I suspect most of the States, was Hereford. By the mid '70s it was probably getting close to half and half. Angus has passed Shorthorn as the second most popular breed.

Angus are an okay breed. They have their issues just like anything else. The only issue I have is the problems generated by CAB.

 

[Warren Allison]

I would bet money that at least 80 percent of Angus are related withing five generations... and through multiple generations. And the gene pool is getting narrower as time goes on. AI and flushing cows has produced some damn fine animals, but continued use over time is putting everything on one side of the family tree, and only a few branches. And the Angus that are being used to put the black in other breeds are the same ones that are at the top of the Angus pyramid of top bulls. The top bulls produce the next tier of registered bulls through females that are likely related to the top bulls, and then those bulls produce the next tier of commercial bulls that sire more than half the beef in the country... and the percentage is growing.

We can agree that CAB has been the greatest marketing strategy ever devised... and has has some fantastic returns in the short term. But long term it's a very, very bad idea.

I agree about AI and embryo transfer. And this would be true even if Limousines were still red and Simms red & white spotted. People want to AI to the top bulls of their breed.
Two Eyed Jack was the first AQHA stallion that was really promoted as an AI sire, He is probably still the winningest sire of AQHA champions, because there were so many sons and daughters being shown. But his sons were not all that expensive to breed to. There were soon 100's of them standing stud. In the 70's and 80's nearly 25% of the horses shown at AQHA shows were Two Eyed Jacks. In contrast, The Jockey Club, until recently, did not allow AI of Thoroughbreds, and still won't allow ET. You can now AI your mare, but the stallion has to be collected with the mare in the barn, and then she must be AI'ed at time of collection...with a vet to certify it all. That's why every horse at the track isn't a son or daughter of Secretariat, and that is a good thing.