Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
Here is the Registered cows.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Brandonm2" data-source="post: 106916" data-attributes="member: 2095"><p>"Bigger is not always better but to me me smaller is never better." </p><p></p><p>I agree with most of that; but I am old enough to remember the last days of the 600-720 pound frame score 2 commercial cow. I am not eager to go back there; but they were really easy keeping cattle and they were always fat. I knew one ranch up the road that ran 220 Angus cows on 220 acres of ground AND produced all of it's own hay and NOT all of it was open. My grandfather ran 100 little Herefords (bred up from Jersey dairy cattle) on Kentucky 31 fescue, Johnsongrass, kudzu, and caley peas and he weaned a 90% calf crop and all his heifers calved at 24 months with very little supplemental feed and he almost always made money at the end of the year and when he culled it was for losing a calf almost NEVER for skipping a calf. Granted weaning weights WERE laughable; but a 630 pound mama cow weaning a 375 pound calf is a whole lot more efficient than a 1600 pound cow weaning a 600 pound calf and you could butcher that little calf at weaning age and have much more tender eating than today's big framed calf. AND those little calves did win plenty of shows back in their day. I realize that we now no longer grass fatten (which is what the 1950s-60s cattle were bred for) and there is no more premiun for veal or the super tender "baby beef" so I don't expect those "belt buckle" cattle to return; but the smaller framed cattle did have some advantages.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brandonm2, post: 106916, member: 2095"] "Bigger is not always better but to me me smaller is never better." I agree with most of that; but I am old enough to remember the last days of the 600-720 pound frame score 2 commercial cow. I am not eager to go back there; but they were really easy keeping cattle and they were always fat. I knew one ranch up the road that ran 220 Angus cows on 220 acres of ground AND produced all of it's own hay and NOT all of it was open. My grandfather ran 100 little Herefords (bred up from Jersey dairy cattle) on Kentucky 31 fescue, Johnsongrass, kudzu, and caley peas and he weaned a 90% calf crop and all his heifers calved at 24 months with very little supplemental feed and he almost always made money at the end of the year and when he culled it was for losing a calf almost NEVER for skipping a calf. Granted weaning weights WERE laughable; but a 630 pound mama cow weaning a 375 pound calf is a whole lot more efficient than a 1600 pound cow weaning a 600 pound calf and you could butcher that little calf at weaning age and have much more tender eating than today's big framed calf. AND those little calves did win plenty of shows back in their day. I realize that we now no longer grass fatten (which is what the 1950s-60s cattle were bred for) and there is no more premiun for veal or the super tender "baby beef" so I don't expect those "belt buckle" cattle to return; but the smaller framed cattle did have some advantages. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
Here is the Registered cows.
Top