Holden Herefords

[cattleman99]

No matter what traits you are talking about breeding 2 extremes will lead to inconsistency.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

regenwether-

I agree with both posts, by KNERSIE - AND cattleman99. Both Holden's and Lent's Genetics are excellent for the selections that they have chosen and linebred to achieve the results they have today. But genes and alleles and chromosomes are NOT necessarily identical in characteristics. Linebreeding, by predetermination, has focused on specific genetic factors that may not be in compliance with the same traits and characteristics one seeks using BOTH excellent individuals from two different lines within the same breed.

Ford, General Motors and Chrysler make excellent vehicles, but they differ in enough incidentals that what may be one person's meat is another person's poison! Managing 'mulitiple traits' in breeding livestock is a tricky game, and much thought and planning is required to obtain the results one wishes to achieve. But focusing on "Single Trait Selection" protocols is NOT the way to anchor-in the characteristics for which you are seeking. There simply is NO easy answer to good genetic management.

But you have to try!

DOC HARRIS

 

[regenwether]

1600 cow wt? Wrong direction for me. I will be the first to admit I have some cows in my herd that size. I'm culling them as fast as I can.

I would consider that frame size a Terminal cross.

I've seen Holdens Bull catalog. When they have birth wt's over 100# I shake my head. I have a calf puller. It isn't for daily use.

I'll take it one step forwad. I've never been around Lent's or Holden cattle but I'll bet in the feedlot end the lent's will net you better on the end.

I sell feeders and also feed out cattle. Some of you out there need to feed some out with this +$4 corn.

The only thing good about the larger frame cattle is if you pay this high dollar feeder cattle price you have to get them cattle to ave. 1350-1375 wt. in the end to pan out.

It is a tight rope to balance. You just have to make sure that rope does not hang you!

 

[Herefords.US]

I'll take it one step forwad. I've never been around Lent's or Holden cattle but I'll bet in the feedlot end the lent's will net you better on the end.

I'd probably take you up on that bet! And I'd also bet that the extra weaning weight of the Holden cattle would better benefit the cow/calf producer on the bottom line. Somewhere in the middle, as far as cow size goes, might be ideal. I just don't think you'd want to try to get there by crossing the two lines. The Holden cattle aren't that extreme in frame size. They are just heavy where they stand with good depth of body, width, and volume.

I've seen Holdens Bull catalog. When they have birth wt's over 100# I shake my head. I have a calf puller. It isn't for daily use.

Also, Holden has only had ONE bull in the last two sales that had a BW of 100+ lbs. As a breeder who very seldom sees BWs in my own herd that approach 90 lb., they still seem high to me, but in watching posts from others here who live up in the cooler climates and who calve in winter, the Holden BWs seem to compare favorably to what they experience.

George

 

[Idaman]

In regard to the crossing of two linebred but dissimilar lines as the Lents cattle and the Line 1's isn't a good example the Korb Super Anxiety cattle of Kansas. They took the Jim Cole Anxiety 4th herd and crossed it with the much different and larger Canadian bred cattle.

There are people on this forum that have a much closer and thorough knowledge of those cattle than I do but from what I have seen they are very good. The Cole cattle weren't as extremely small as the Lents cattle but of pretty much the same bloodlines.

The differences in ones weaning weight, yearling weight, mature weight, and feedlot performance is all centered around efficiency or at least as the Angus $EN+$W's try to show efficiency. If Holdens cows weigh 1,800 lbs. then a 1,100 lb. cow would take only 61% as much annual energy to produce a calf. With that in mind then the heavier cow should be able to wean at least 50% of her weight or 900 lbs. efficiently and year after year. The 1,100 cow should also wean 50% of her weight which is 550 lbs efficiently and yearly. There is a 350 lb difference in weaning weights but under my conditions I will come much, much closer to attaining the 550 lb. calf senario. I simply can run 1.63 as many cows that weigh 1,100 as the 1800 pounders. Under most range conditions there just aren't too many 1,800 lb. cows weaning 900 lb. calves, maintaining their body condition and breeding back year after year.

 

[Herefords.US]

In regard to the crossing of two linebred but dissimilar lines as the Lents cattle and the Line 1's isn't a good example the Korb Super Anxiety cattle of Kansas. They took the Jim Cole Anxiety 4th herd and crossed it with the much different and larger Canadian bred cattle.

There are people on this forum that have a much closer and thorough knowledge of those cattle than I do but from what I have seen they are very good. The Cole cattle weren't as extremely small as the Lents cattle but of pretty much the same bloodlines.

The differences in ones weaning weight, yearling weight, mature weight, and feedlot performance is all centered around efficiency or at least as the Angus $EN+$W's try to show efficiency. If Holdens cows weigh 1,800 lbs. then a 1,100 lb. cow would take only 61% as much annual energy to produce a calf. With that in mind then the heavier cow should be able to wean at least 50% of her weight or 900 lbs. efficiently and year after year. The 1,100 cow should also wean 50% of her weight which is 550 lbs efficiently and yearly. There is a 350 lb difference in weaning weights but under my conditions I will come much, much closer to attaining the 550 lb. calf senario. I simply can run 1.63 as many cows that weigh 1,100 as the 1800 pounders. Under most range conditions there just aren't too many 1,800 lb. cows weaning 900 lb. calves, maintaining their body condition and breeding back year after year.

First, I said the Holden cows that I've seen were around 1600 lb - not 1800 lb. Also, with the exception of those in Bobby Edgar's herd that I saw back in 2003, most of the Holden cows that I've seen were donor cows...and probably exceptional. Someone who has visited Holdens and seen the whole cowherd would be a more reliable source on judging their average weight. There are several that read this forum.

Second, you might be able to get 550 lb. calves from 1100 lb. cows in your environment, but if past history is indicative of what the Lents herd still achieves today, their 205 day WWs would be much nearer 400 lb. on average. In our environment and selecting for performance, we were just starting to get WW's that topped 500 lb. averages in straight Anxiety 4th cattle with the Becker influence. And that was from cows that averaged 1200 to 1400 lb. fat. I haven't seen the Lents cattle in a number of years, but based on others' reports who have, the mature size or growth rates haven't changed much in those cattle, although Jim has done a very good job of improving phenotype.

Third, based on studies I've seen in the past, there is a minimum basis for maintaining a cow. Energy requirements don't proportionally follow weight. On average, 15 1000 lb. cows will cost more to maintain than 10 1500 lb. cows, even though the total pounds are the same.

George

 

[deenranch]

George...

I just had a chance to watch this sale today... There are a few of those cows that have a new home about an hour and a half southwest of you... My uncle was up there and bought three lots...

 

[KNERSIE]

In regard to the crossing of two linebred but dissimilar lines as the Lents cattle and the Line 1's isn't a good example the Korb Super Anxiety cattle of Kansas. They took the Jim Cole Anxiety 4th herd and crossed it with the much different and larger Canadian bred cattle.

There are people on this forum that have a much closer and thorough knowledge of those cattle than I do but from what I have seen they are very good. The Cole cattle weren't as extremely small as the Lents cattle but of pretty much the same bloodlines.

I've followed a few Coyote Creek cattle for the last few years and came to the conclusion they ain't all that and a bag of chips. Mostly poor doers, poor millkers and very little muscle where it matters. One thing of them is they seemed to be very easy calvers.

 

[Idaman]

In regard to the crossing of two linebred but dissimilar lines as the Lents cattle and the Line 1's isn't a good example the Korb Super Anxiety cattle of Kansas. They took the Jim Cole Anxiety 4th herd and crossed it with the much different and larger Canadian bred cattle.

There are people on this forum that have a much closer and thorough knowledge of those cattle than I do but from what I have seen they are very good. The Cole cattle weren't as extremely small as the Lents cattle but of pretty much the same bloodlines.

I've followed a few Coyote Creek cattle for the last few years and came to the conclusion they ain't all that and a bag of chips. Mostly poor doers, poor millkers and very little muscle where it matters. One thing of them is they seemed to be very easy calvers.

As I said there are certainly more people on here that are much more knowledgable than I am on the Korb cattle but the people I have talked to that have them are very pleased. It really makes no difference to me either way but I wanted to point out that an extreme difference cross is available to analyze.

 

[Idaman]

American Angus Association

A Cow Energy Value ($EN ) is available with the
Spring, 2005 EPD release to assess differences in
cow-energy requirements, expressed in dollars per
cow per year, as an expected dollar savings difference
in future daughters' of sires. A larger value is
more favorable when comparing two animals. The
bulls pictured in this catalog have an average of
+24.99 ($EN), and the breeds' average on bulls is
+2.67 ($EN). In this example, the expected difference
would be:
+24.99 - + 2.67 = +22.32
A +22.32 savings per year per animal.
After analyzing the new ($EN) number and ($W)
number from the American Angus Association, we
were curious how the DDA Fahren 21X's numbers
would stack-up compared to all the bulls in the
breed. We entered 21X's numbers and asked the
database to find all the bulls that were as good
as, or better than, the 21X bull. In the entire Angus
breed, there were only two bulls that were better in
these two, new categories.
I n the past, the American Angus Association
has had many numbers to measure production.
Cattle with the most production also require the
most inputs. It is very good to see the association
develop a number that could help with profit, not
just production.

These are black cattle also from Valier, Montana.

 

[rocket2222]

I missed the sale this year, last year what impressed me the most was the pre-show they had on RFD, I'm sure they had sorted out some of their best, it was pretty impressive sight when showed some of the cow herd munching on a little hay, stout would be the best way to describe them, thick topped, wide based with good bone, defiantly not the scrawny looking 7 frame most people associate with a 1600 lb cow

 

[Idaman]

COW / CALF RATIO Diamond D Angus
We calculate adjusted wean efficiency for each cow/calf pair.
Adjusted wean efficiency is computed as the ratio of calf's adjusted
205 day weight to the cows adjusted weight. The adjusted
cow weight is estimated by a process of rating each cow's body
condition and giving her a score. A score of "5" is the median
(no adjustment taken), 80 pounds is subtracted from her weight
for a score of "6" and 80 pounds is added to her weight for a
score of "4". By adjusting cow weights to equal body condition
scores, it rewards cows that produce a bigger calf while maintaining
her own body condition. Adjusted cow/calf ratio is shown for
each sale bull in the catalog.

As I look through the catalog I see ratios from 33% to 77% so there is a wide range even in the same herd and management. Some of the studies I have seen conclude that the Angus perspective is the most accurate and a few conclude that the difference is smaller. At least the Angus breed has two types to choose from whereas the Herefords have very few choices when it comes to size. To the lower input crowd this is vitally important.

Over many years in our environment the cows will average within a very few pounds of 1100. If they have a size 1600 lb. frame then they will be open and thin or calve every other year. The ones that are a 1100 frame tend to be in good condition and annually bred. The calves will average about 550 no matter what the cow frame size is. So for pure economics and low inputs we know which way to go.

 

[Brandonm22]

Third, based on studies I've seen in the past, there is a minimum basis for maintaining a cow. Energy requirements don't proportionally follow weight. On average, 15 1000 lb. cows will cost more to maintain than 10 1500 lb. cows, even though the total pounds are the same.

George

I would a whole lot rather have the paycheck for the 15 calves out of the moderate cows than the paycheck for the 10 calves out of the big cows.....and 90% of the time the 15 calves will outweigh the 10 calves too if total pounds are what we are chasing.

 

[JHH]

Third, based on studies I've seen in the past, there is a minimum basis for maintaining a cow. Energy requirements don't proportionally follow weight. On average, 15 1000 lb. cows will cost more to maintain than 10 1500 lb. cows, even though the total pounds are the same.

George

I would a whole lot rather have the paycheck for the 15 calves out of the moderate cows than the paycheck for the 10 calves out of the big cows.....and 90% of the time the 15 calves will outweigh the 10 calves too if total pounds are what we are chasing.

I guess it depends on the cows. If 15 wean 500lb calves at 1.20 a pound then that 600.00 each.that is hard to beat with the 10 calves weaning the same weight.

It would have to come down to input costs to get the cows to wean those calves. I would rather have the 15 calves to. to many things involved to just say that the bigger cows will out perform the little ones. every year they are different.

Most of the holden bred cows I have seen have been from lowdermans at there sale and then at Mr findley's place. I would say it depends. there were some that were in my opinion to big for me but I dont remember the bulls number. But the 320n offspring seem moderate and just about right for me. I would say they will weigh in around the 1200-1300 mark I may be all wrong.


Sure gives a person something to think about

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Sure gives a person something to think about

-

The "operative" word here is "think"! It has been my experience that whenever this type of discussion rears its head in a group of breeders, the one factor which seems to evade the discussion, and therefore the ultimate sensible conclusion is - they neglect to consider (THINK) the over all topics covering expenditures of production, maintenance, development, and 'pasture grazing' costs! Everything costs money, and a smaller cow is more profitable - as much as $90.00 to $100.00 per year more profitable, depending on feed costs and rainfall.

It's the "LITTLE THINGS" that you must THINK about!

DOC HARRIS

 

[Idaman]

Critique me here but we have been recently appalled that our delivery weight on our steers calves has exceeded 500 lb. There has always been a premium on calves under 500 and we were able to hold them to 495 for many years and so when we broke the barrier and lost the premium is was concerning.

Our reasoning has always been that our ranch with minimal inputs will produce a certain overall number of pounds of calf weight per year and that we should get the highest market price per pound for those pounds that we can. Because of the market we need to deliver after Thanksgiving and calve early enough to have all the cows rebred by May 1. This almost forces us to a larger number of smaller framed cows that could pull our weights back under 500 lbs., fulfill the time restraints, and still produce the maximum total pounds of calf that the ranch is capable of producing.

 

[Brandonm22]

Critique me here but we have been recently appalled that our delivery weight on our steers calves has exceeded 500 lb. There has always been a premium on calves under 500 and we were able to hold them to 495 for many years and so when we broke the barrier and lost the premium is was concerning.

Our reasoning has always been that our ranch with minimal inputs will produce a certain overall number of pounds of calf weight per year and that we should get the highest market price per pound for those pounds that we can. Because of the market we need to deliver after Thanksgiving and calve early enough to have all the cows rebred by May 1. This almost forces us to a larger number of smaller framed cows that could pull our weights back under 500 lbs., fulfill the time restraints, and still produce the maximum total pounds of calf that the ranch is capable of producing.

Historically down here if you market in the fall runs the stocker guys (who winter the calves on cropland planted in annuals like winter wheat and rye grass as a cover crop to protect the ground from erosion) buy the four weight calves and bid up the price. If calves get above 550 lbs it will be too heavy for them when they market the calves before planting so the feedlots are the only buyers for the heavier calves. And the fall is when the feedlots have all the calves they need. I have sold loads where 485 lb calves born at the end of the calving season brought the same to a little bit more than 75% sibs weighing 725 born in the first days of the season. I don't know that I would change genetics to get weaning weights below 500 lbs, but as you get farther past 500 lbs (historically) in market weight the rewards per 25 lbs of body weight get progressively smaller. One would think that higher grain prices will mean that heavier calves would do a little better but somebody needs to show me the math on that one.

 

[Idaman]

Critique me here but we have been recently appalled that our delivery weight on our steers calves has exceeded 500 lb. There has always been a premium on calves under 500 and we were able to hold them to 495 for many years and so when we broke the barrier and lost the premium is was concerning.

Our reasoning has always been that our ranch with minimal inputs will produce a certain overall number of pounds of calf weight per year and that we should get the highest market price per pound for those pounds that we can. Because of the market we need to deliver after Thanksgiving and calve early enough to have all the cows rebred by May 1. This almost forces us to a larger number of smaller framed cows that could pull our weights back under 500 lbs., fulfill the time restraints, and still produce the maximum total pounds of calf that the ranch is capable of producing.

Historically down here if you market in the fall runs the stocker guys (who winter the calves on cropland planted in annuals like winter wheat and rye grass as a cover crop to protect the ground from erosion) buy the four weight calves and bid up the price. If calves get above 550 lbs it will be too heavy for them when they market the calves before planting so the feedlots are the only buyers for the heavier calves. And the fall is when the feedlots have all the calves they need. I have sold loads where 485 lb calves born at the end of the calving season brought the same to a little bit more than 75% sibs weighing 725 born in the first days of the season. I don't know that I would change genetics to get weaning weights below 500 lbs, but as you get farther past 500 lbs (historically) in market weight the rewards per 25 lbs of body weight get progressively smaller. One would think that higher grain prices will mean that heavier calves would do a little better but somebody needs to show me the math on that one.

That has been our experience as well. Our calves go to California for winter grass that doesn't get ready until after Thanksgiving. They want weaned calves at that time that can go directly on grass without having to go through a processing lot with the added expense. They will pay a pretty good premium for those calves if they are under 500 lbs when offered via satellite in late July.

 

[regenwether]

320N is the one bull I would use for replacement Heifers. The rest of their bulls have impressive numbers but I'm fear they would rise my herd's frame size.

I'd put 320N on purbred Angus for Blk Baldies.

 

[regenwether]

We are getting off subject a bit. Idaman just curious, do you creep at all? What are the age of those calve's when you sell them. Sounds like they are pretty green so I bet they gain well. Do you know what your Cattle wt. are when they go to slaughter and at what age. Thank you.