Chasing fads

Help Support CattleToday:

Frankie

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
6,915
Reaction score
1
Location
Oklahoma
Well said, Steve.

"Words mean more than what's in the dictionary. Some can be rhetorical devices loaded with positive or negative undertones. Consider “chase” and all its forms.

A dictionary says the verb means to pursue in order to overtake or capture; to persistently seek the favor of; or, just the opposite, to drive away. The derisive derivative most common in the cattle industry comes from the centuries-old noun phrase, “wild goose chase.” That is, “an absurd search for something nonexistent or unobtainable; any senseless pursuit of an object or end.”

In broader society, we criticize opportunistic lawyers as ambulance chasers. Politicians chase votes. Stock traders chase profits. Detectives chase down a lead but worry about chasing shadows and ghosts. Storm trackers chase tornadoes. Fools chase the sun, clouds and rainbows.

Poor business practices chase employees and customers away. Undisciplined dogs chase cars, cats, rabbits, squirrels, butterflies and their own tails.

It's usually better to lead than chase cattle, but one calorie-counting authority estimates a moderate walk in non-strenuous cattle chasing burns 238 calories per hour for a 150-pound person. At that rate, it would take more than three hours to walk off a Big Mac.

You may be thinking of another idiom: cut to the chase, or get to the point.

Some beef industry pundits proclaim ideal pathways for all logical producers. Dissenters are deluded and must be “chasing” something.

You can sense the judgment and condemnation in the cliché warning, “don't chase single-trait selection.” It's such an obvious no-no that the only surprise is that we keep seeing the warning. There is usually an agenda, such as to imply that if you so much as include some popular trait, you are off on a rabbit trail. If you know the phrase at all, you know it's like saying, “don't chase your tail.”

Some intense cattlemen lash out with the “c” word. They may include their goals and aspirations, which never include so much as a stray glance at what they own as a senseless pursuit. However, those who see things differently are condescendingly lamented as chasing an illusive and impractical dream.

The most chased-after end seems to be genetic selection that would add value to the beef we sell to consumers. One might as well chase ping-pong balls or a cure for cancer. Critics include the range of those who see any attention to post-weaning traits as silly, to those who see it as a noble, if impossible dream.

When the rhetoric starts flying, a critic may deplore “chasing” something or other. He will usually balance that by pointing out the further errors of “ignoring” and “sacrificing” other things. The implication is that those slighted pursuits are at least as worthy as that being chased after, but the chaser is too blind to see.

It all boils down to bias in the critic. Look at their cattle, their field of study, perhaps their life's work. They may not realize their bias or the condescending nature of their chase to enlighten others. Or, they could be using loaded words in a calculated manner to sell something.

Discussions that give rise to accusations of chase often deal with the idea that breeds have certain rigid roles in the cattle industry. No breed should evolve to something other than its textbook description. Producers of any supposed maternal breed had better not chase those traits that have been defined somewhere as better provided by terminal breeds. Those who are supposed to be raising terminal cattle may improve maternal traits only at the risk of such criticism.

Evolution in response to the market leads to convergence of type, which confounds the crossbreeding strategy of breed complementarity. Those who see crossbreeding as the only logical choice may want to keep breed differences as static as they were in the research that supports their programs.

To say anyone, any group or an entire industry is chasing something is to insult their individual or collective intelligence. Although the shoe sometimes fits, it is hardly constructive to call them on it. Maybe you have superior knowledge. Maybe you are off chasing squirrels while barking at the hounds on point.

Next time in Black Ink, Miranda Reiman will look at the role of consultants and advisors. Questions? Call toll-free at 877-241-0717 or e-mail [email protected]."

http://cattletoday.com/archive/2007/January/CT783.shtml
 
LOL, funny how Suther changed his bias when he went to work for AAA. ;-)


Badlands
 
Steve Suther

"One of the reasons I became involved in
US Premium Beef (USPB), was because I felt
commercial producers should receive more
for using high quality Angus genetics. Today
USPB pays $20.13 per cwt. for each and every
Prime carcass, and $4.11 per cwt. for every
CAB carcass. An 800-pound Prime carcass is
worth $161 dollars more per head, and an
800-pound CAB carcass is worth $35 more
per head. USPB is proud to pay some of the
highest premiums in the business for highquality
Angus cattle, and I’m even more proud
that we have helped the other packers see the
light and pay more money for the high quality
Angus cattle (trust me they didn’t start doing it
out of the goodness of their hearts). This is
good news for the beef business because these
economic incentives help pull the better beef
products through to the consumer. The greatest
news in the beef world today is that by
improving product quality we have stabilized
beef demand.
So what does this all mean to Angus breeders?
We have Angus cattle. They put up good
quality grades on the rail. We have Certified
Angus Beef. Everything is great, right?
WRONG! Barely 17% of all eligible Angus
cattle meet the minimum requirements for
CAB. The biggest reason CAB still struggles
with supply is because carcass traits of Angus
cattle have not been good enough.
When you
look at the selection strategies our breed has
applied over the past 33 years you find that the
Angus breed has increased the yearling growth
by about 37%. However, during the same
period you find that we have only improved
the marbling by +.20 units and REA by +.25 in.
and most of that has come in the last 5 years.
In other words, we have made very little genetic
change in our breed for carcass traits.
Carcass traits are highly heritable. We
should be able to make more change with carcass
traits than growth traits. We have not.

WHY? The American Angus Association has the
largest carcass database in the world, and it is
increasing rapidly. Breeders have not used this
information enough, but that’s about to change.
The genetic trend for carcass traits has
increased in the last 8 years and is going to
“blast off” because the breed’s commitment to
ultrasound measurement of carcass traits. The
Angus breed is now measuring “carcass traits”
on over 120,000 head each year via ultrasound.
Is ultrasound data accurate? YES! It is
more accurate than carcass data. Everybody
assumes that kill data is perfect, when the reality
is that gathering kill data is very subjective,
it suffers from the variability among USDA
graders to the speed at which this data must be
gathered.
As your Angus colleague I encourage
you to embrace this system."

Talk about chasing fads. :roll:
 
Reality will set in. The truth hurts sometimes.

Anyone besides me ever hear of a "Pipe Chase"
 

Latest posts

Top