Huh? Comments, please

Help Support CattleToday:

houstoncutter":zu39oy23 said:
I sorta think God wanted cattle to eat grass, not feed or feed supplements.

I got into a rather heated discussion on another board with a gent who feels that a certain amount of grain is good for cattle. Something about balancing the ruemn flora. The point I had tried to make was that if the cattle are selected to work well on your forage base, in our case high endophyte fescue, grain wasn't required. The point I had tried to make was that genetics are significant in cattles ability to thrive under pasture conditions.

dun
 
cattle_gal":3izs711k said:
When a bull buyer asks about a bull on what a bulls offspring may wean at when he has a 43 WW and the breeder says, 43 more lbs than a 0. Did the bull buyer get an answer. No. What the heck is 0. It's a question I've yet to see a real answer on. A very simple concept that doesn't let anyone know the begining of how the concept came to those numbers. So could I say that 43 EPD is 43 more lbs than a 0 which is 500 lbs? Probably not. If an EPD can not correlate to what a WW/YW is most likely to be, what good is it. Ah it's good to mystify the person to what is good and what is mediocer with out actualy saying what the good stands for. I've studied the EPD's of the Angus as I also buy the females and I watch closely the Wean and Yearling weight and correlate to there EPD's and there offsprings EPD's(alongwith the sire). And look at their siblings.

epd's were not designed to give you an exact weight. they were designed to be used as a comparison between animals of the same breed. when they were first set up, 0 was breed average. since then the breed averages have shifted (i would think mostly upwards) so a 0 epd is no longer breed average.

just because you can't give an exact weight with epd's, there's no reason a commercial cattleman looking at one breed of bulls (or several breeds if across-breed epd's are available) can't use them. if he sees Bull A has a ww epd of +50 & Bull B has a ww epd of +10, why wouldn't he understand and want to use the bull whose calves are expected to weigh 40 lbs heavier at weaning if his main objective is to sell everything at weaning?
 
houstoncutter":z3gvjvok said:
I thought maybe the Red Angus producers were working on something along those lines. Of course it would be nice to know if a replacement bull had ever had feed. They are hard to find these days but it never hurts to look for em. I sorta think God wanted cattle to eat grass, not feed or feed supplements. Sometimes I wonder if the feeding of our cattle might not be causing our high levels of cancer and heart disease
You make an interesting point however you and everyone else sees cattle with no feed in them and they look sorry. Look at the Mullendore beef thread. No one has spent more money on seedstock and recordkeeping than Bob. He is honest and is in the middle of cow country. Had the best auctioner and a nice facility and the sale couldn't have been worse. Very few operations can sell any volume of bulls without any feed in them. Just how much would you pay for bulls with no feed in them.
Why not use common sense and say that cattle with a more conventional phenotype with a more moderate frame and excess volume and muscle will be easier to keep on forage and the larger framed more extreme animal. The larger animal will work better probably on a higher concentrate program .
 
Correct EPD's are far from exact. They are a theory. With Angus In '77 they probably were 0, I think now they are 70-77 points/lbs up. Like I said before I've seen lower EPD cattle do better than higher EPD cattle. The theory failed. But by god a producer can say they've got a high WW EPD calf even though he looks like a piece of junk. And sadly someone would buy a bull come yearling based on the EPD number even though he sucked on actual weaning weight - which of course only his WW EPD would be disclosed not his actual 205 weight. I get catalogs all the
time that never say what the wean or yearling weight was, but have the EPD's there to sell him, except when some sell as a 18 month old that's fat as all get out and looks stout.

In order for there to be a X number above the average we have to start out with a number which would be the breed average. What is, say, the Angus WW or YW average lbs? Does anyone know? Then we can go from there and determine what he is theoretically to weigh. Of course there's all the add in this and subtract that in those equations. The X number still means nothing to a potential buyer who wants the best bull he can, looking at all breeds. I'm all for an across breeds EPD (using the same equations and rules), or should I say more for an across breeds
APD's. Actual Profit Difference.

We all know that some breeds knock the socks off of other breeds for traits. But what if one breed knows they aren't the top in a trait when compared to other breeds and don't want to lose all the marketing they have done to where they promote optimum this or that. They wouldn't be
very keen on wanting producers to know that there is some other breed out there better by making an across breeds EPD/APD avalible so easily.

Anyone know what is the percentage is that Jr is going to be exactly half of each parents genes as the EPD's calculate? Add mom and dad together and divide by 2 and that's what Jr will be. Hmm no numbers until Jr has his information in on that weight and living conditions.

Speaking of living conditions does anyone know how they calculate this? Those in the midwest with easy conditions versus the arid and mountain conditions?
 
remember......epd's are just a tool to be used in conjuction with all the other evaluation/purchasing options. i would never recommend purchasing an animal on epd's alone.

cattle_gal":333rjmr9 said:
Like I said before I've seen lower EPD cattle do better than higher EPD cattle. The theory failed.

it's not exact and it's not flawless. surely you have to admit that bulls that sometimes look the best don't always produce the best looking calves, either?

cattle_gal":333rjmr9 said:
But by god a producer can say they've got a high WW EPD calf even though he looks like a piece of junk. And sadly someone would buy a bull come yearling based on the EPD number even though he sucked on actual weaning weight - which of course only his WW EPD would be disclosed not his actual 205 weight. I get catalogs all the time that never say what the wean or yearling weight was, but have the EPD's there to sell him, except when some sell as a 18 month old that's fat as all get out and looks stout.

you're right. this happens all the time, but it's not just with epd's. sometimes catalogs won't list a weaning weight but they'll put a low birthweight & advertise him as a low birthweight bull & vice versa. i've also seen adjusted 205-weights given when actual is not disclosed. i think adjusted weights almost always work to the advantage of the calves weaned earlier rather than later. or maybe carcass data is listed instead of weights or epd's. also...it works the other way as well.....actual weights may be given instead of epd's (if the epd's aren't up to par). is this right? maybe. is it good marketing? probably.

cattle_gal":333rjmr9 said:
In order for there to be a X number above the average we have to start out with a number which would be the breed average. What is, say, the Angus WW or YW average lbs? Does anyone know? Then we can go from there and determine what he is theoretically to weigh.

once again, epd's will never give an actual weight......even if you know the breed average. epd's are designed to be a comparison between animals, not an exact weight. another thing epd's do not do is give estimates for the animal in question. epd's are "expected progeny differences" so it's an estimate of how his calves will perform not how he will perform.

cattle_gal":333rjmr9 said:
Anyone know what is the percentage is that Jr is going to be exactly half of each parents genes as the EPD's calculate? Add mom and dad together and divide by 2 and that's what Jr will be. Hmm no numbers until Jr has his information in on that weight and living conditions.

i'm not sure i follow you here. with herefords, calves are assigned epd's as soon as they are registered. for an animal without offspring, his/her epd's are simply as you mentioned....sire + dam divided by two. is he/she an exact middle of the two parents? no, but until the animal in question has progeny of their own, the best estimate is to assume it inherited equally from both parents.

cattle_gal":333rjmr9 said:
Speaking of living conditions does anyone know how they calculate this? Those in the midwest with easy conditions versus the arid and mountain conditions?

sorry, but can't tell you how they calculate it, but geographical location is supposed to be included in the calculation somehow. that's why there are contemporary groups....animals in the same environment & managment are compared to each other. you may want to contact one of the breed associations. someone there may be able to answer your question or direct you to someone who can (maybe the university that set up the epd calculations)

here is a link to the '04 AHA sire summary preface with a very good explanation of epd's:

http://www.hereford.org/Acrobat/Perf/ss_S04_Preface.pdf
 
dun":1db49m15 said:
Red Angus have the metebolic energy, or some such epd. The lower the number the less feed intake/nutirional intake.

dun

I've been thinking about this and I think they call it Maintinence Energy, depicted as ME

dun
 
houstoncutter":1jk33ap3 said:
I sorta think God wanted cattle to eat grass, not feed or feed supplements.
Why?
Do you also think He didn't want planned mating, deworming,pasture improvement,fences,etc....
 
I have a specific question for Frankie, Txag, Amazed, and any other die-hard EPD fans. I ask this honestly, and not with any intent to be a smart-aleck or unfriendly:

If you were searching for a replacement heifer or bull, and you had a choice between an animal that looked better, had better performance, and at least as good carcass data, but lower EPDs, and an animal that had higher EPDs but nothing else was as good, which would you choose? Add to this equation that the lower EPD animal's siblings had consistently ratioed better in the herd than the higher EPD animal's siblings. As you know, it takes a lot of data to move EPDs, and this scenario is very possible; indeed, I have seen it.
 
greenwillowherefords":1mtndfal said:
I have a specific question for Frankie, Txag, Amazed, and any other die-hard EPD fans. I ask this honestly, and not with any intent to be a smart-aleck or unfriendly:

If you were searching for a replacement heifer or bull, and you had a choice between an animal that looked better, had better performance, and at least as good carcass data, but lower EPDs, and an animal that had higher EPDs but nothing else was as good, which would you choose? Add to this equation that the lower EPD animal's siblings had consistently ratioed better in the herd than the higher EPD animal's siblings. As you know, it takes a lot of data to move EPDs, and this scenario is very possible; indeed, I have seen it.

Neither. When I buy an animal I want a total package deal. This why it is very rare that I buy anything other than semen.
 
Tod Dague":3smhy3pc said:
Neither. When I buy an animal I want a total package deal. This why it is very rare that I buy anything other than semen.

Well said!

dun
 
greenwillowherefords":1a7qc98h said:
I have a specific question for Frankie, Txag, Amazed, and any other die-hard EPD fans. I ask this honestly, and not with any intent to be a smart-aleck or unfriendly:

If you were searching for a replacement heifer or bull, and you had a choice between an animal that looked better, had better performance, and at least as good carcass data, but lower EPDs, and an animal that had higher EPDs but nothing else was as good, which would you choose? Add to this equation that the lower EPD animal's siblings had consistently ratioed better in the herd than the higher EPD animal's siblings. As you know, it takes a lot of data to move EPDs, and this scenario is very possible; indeed, I have seen it.

well, since you threw my name in the question, i'll answer, even though i'm not a "die-hard EPD" fan. i answer the EPD questions to raise awareness and to help people UNDERSTAND them. you can't use them if you don't understand them. anyone in the registered or seedstock business should at least understand them even if they don't believe in them or want to use them.

anyway, to answer your question, you still haven't given enough information. how much "lower" are the epd's? how much "better" was the performance? how much "better" does the other animal look? what are their pedigrees? are they contemporaries? were they raised the same way (feed, management)?

without knowing all this, i'd have to agree with Tod & dun & say neither because i'll repeat myself here......epd's are just a tool to be used along with all other purchasing/breeding decisions. you have to look at the total package.
 
txag":bt4052ho said:
remember......epd's are just a tool to be used in conjuction with all the other evaluation/purchasing options. i would never recommend purchasing an animal on epd's alone.

Thank God ;-)

txag":bt4052ho said:
it's not exact and it's not flawless. surely you have to admit that bulls that sometimes look the best don't always produce the best looking calves, either?

Much agree. I've seen the worst calves out of the "best" bulls. Someone sure had enough cattle bred to that bull to off set the data from the rest of the other herds who had calves out of him.


txag":bt4052ho said:
i think adjusted weights almost always work to the advantage of the calves weaned earlier rather than later. or maybe carcass data is listed instead of weights or epd's. also...it works the other way as well.....actual weights may be given instead of epd's (if the epd's aren't up to par). is this right? maybe. is it good marketing? probably.

the younger they are the higher there numbers will be for the weight and ultrasound. One Angus ranch went up a whole REA inch average in one year on their bulls. Sound fishy, well the AAA allowed a younger age for ultrasound data, so the adjustment went way up to their advantage. I think every Angus catalog I got this year they left out the Rib Fat EPD. They took out an EPD number that made wasn't a asset and made the animal look not as appealing.

txag":bt4052ho said:
once again, epd's will never give an actual weight......even if you know the breed average. epd's are designed to be a comparison between animals, not an exact weight. another thing epd's do not do is give estimates for the animal in question. epd's are "expected progeny differences" so it's an estimate of how his calves will perform not how he will perform.

The only way we can compare across breeds is when we start back to the apples and apples. weight versus weight, ultrasound catagories, feedlot performance, ect. Which is where the APD's are taking head. I don't care about just one breed comparisons. Those that are familiar with that breed know what they like and don't like through the numbers. There needs to be a way that we can take an animal for what it is. And that is through actual data, not numbers on what an association makes of it. I love looking through various actual data that has different breeds on feed(like ranch to rail, gelb alliance, ect) where each breed is treated the same in the same conditions. What I don't like is one breed who has enough money they "give " grants to a college or study to show how well their breed feeds out and they are the only breed in the lot with no other breed for comparison.

txag":bt4052ho said:
for an animal without offspring, his/her epd's are simply as you mentioned....sire + dam divided by two. is he/she an exact middle of the two parents? no, but until the animal in question has progeny of their own, the best estimate is to assume it inherited equally from both parents.

You've got it. I was wondering what the instances of an offspring being 1/2 and 1/2 of each parent. How big of a gamble is it to rely on the EPD of a calf when purchasing or buying a bred cow. Other than cross fingers that the calf turns out more like the trait you want from dam or sire.




txag":bt4052ho said:
sorry, but can't tell you how they calculate it, but geographical location is supposed to be included in the calculation somehow. that's why there are contemporary groups....animals in the same environment & managment are compared to each other. you may want to contact one of the breed associations. someone there may be able to answer your question or direct you to someone who can (maybe the university that set up the epd calculations)

here is a link to the '04 AHA sire summary preface with a very good explanation of epd's:

http://www.hereford.org/Acrobat/Perf/ss_S04_Preface.pdf

I'm a heat the sheet of iron to make a horseshoe type person so I try to get to the start of how they get to all their equations. I tried with the AAA they didn't want to disclose anything. That was after reading all their blah blah on EPD's, which didn't tell me anything I wanted to get to the heart of. I'm going to try harder with the ACA to see if they will lay down the math. Thanks for the link I'll look your breeds information up.
 
cattle_gal":251vqqqj said:
I was wondering what the instances of an offspring being 1/2 and 1/2 of each parent. How big of a gamble is it to rely on the EPD of a calf when purchasing or buying a bred cow. Other than cross fingers that the calf turns out more like the trait you want from dam or sire.

That's the reason multiple past generations should be looked at. Doesn't matter if it's EPDs or actual performance. I've seen too many great looing animals be duds and animals with great EPDs be duds. But if they have both and their ancestors had it, you can be pretty sure that individual will also have those characteristics.

dun
 
cattle_gal":30memh6l said:
I'm a heat the sheet of iron to make a horseshoe type person so I try to get to the start of how they get to all their equations. I tried with the AAA they didn't want to disclose anything. That was after reading all their blah blah on EPD's, which didn't tell me anything I wanted to get to the heart of. I'm going to try harder with the ACA to see if they will lay down the math. Thanks for the link I'll look your breeds information up.

you may try one of the universities. if i'm not mistaken it was Kansas State that came up with the original epd's and calculations. of course, epd's have been around long enough the originators probably aren't there any more but there may be someone who knows.
 
It seems that each breed works with a different university to develop their EPDs. Al though similar mechanations are probably required, I'ld be willing to bet that each association does theirs just a little bit different.

dun
 
Frankie if you want to know what I HATE about epd's go to the the "all you hereford guys" here in the breed board and read the first post. People use epd's this way all the time . They acutally use them this way in my opinion more often than the "correct way" you guys are always talking about.I guess the good thing about people using epd's this way is it eliminates the competition in the seedstock industry.
 
cattle_gal":1uagca41 said:
Many associations have asked the BIF to make an across breeds formula. For years. This gets talked about at breed association meetings. I've also asked the BIF why and why not. But the AAA is the one not wanting to do so.

Years ago, other breed associations laughed and poked fun at the Angus Association while Angus breeders spent their time, money and effort to produce the data that makes up Angus EPDs. Now that commercial cattlemen understand and want EPDs, these same breed associations want to use Angus EPDs to build their own. If they want reliable EPDs, send in the data and create them. The Angus Association is refusing to participate (at this time) and that's OK with me.

I've even asked the AAA how they come up with the formulation. They say - It's complicated. Yeah good way to say - not telling.

The computer program that creates EPDs is a sophisticated, high level mathmatical program. Not to be rude, but you don't even seem to understand what EPDs do. How could you expect to understand the mathmatical formula that they use to create EPDs? Every breed association uses much the same formula; call your other breed association and ask them. Maybe they'll be nicer than the AAA people.

Only a few breed associations can cross reference with AAA EPD's. Many breeders I've talked to from various breeds have buyers always asking - what does that mean in Angus EPD's. Cattlemen who know the AAA EPD's don't know what the other association EPD's mean and ask how this correlates.

I'd take them a copy of MARC's across breeds EPDs. That will give a basis for comparing Angus EPDs with other breeds. But be warned, you might not like the result.

But this would go for any associations EPD on what is what. What is the base to get this number.

The Angus Association took all the BW, WW, YW's reported to the Association in 1976 (I think), averaged them, and called that zero when they started EPDs. But that doesn't mean anything; EPDs have been adjusted since then. The program that creates EPDs has been improved.

When a bull buyer asks about a bull on what a bulls offspring may wean at when he has a 43 WW and the breeder says, 43 more lbs than a 0. Did the bull buyer get an answer. No. What the heck is 0. It's a question I've yet to see a real answer on. A very simple concept that doesn't let anyone know the begining of how the concept came to those numbers. So could I say that 43 EPD is 43 more lbs than a 0 which is 500 lbs? Probably not. If an EPD can not correlate to what a WW/YW is most likely to be, what good is it.

Explain to the bull buyer that EPDs won't tell him what a calf will wean at. EPDs will never, ever tell you what something will weigh. They can't. If you breed a Charloais cow and a Jersey cow to the same bull, would you expect the calf to weigh he same at birth, weaning or yearling? The bull is only half the calf. You may think EPDs are no good, but, believe me, more and more cattlemen are recognizing their value.

Ah it's good to mystify the person to what is good and what is mediocer with out actualy saying what the good stands for.

I hate to break it to you, but you're in the minority if you're mystifed about EPDs. I've explained them to you, as well as others, and you continue to say the same thing. Every breed association probably has a brochure that explains how their EPDs were created. Have you taken the time to read them? The Angus brochure that I prefer to hand out to bull customers who are not so comfortable with EPDs is called "Bull Buying Stategies to Improve your Herd." I'll look for it online and post a link for you. But you have to read it and try to understand what it says.

[I've studied the EPD's of the Angus as I also buy the females and I watch closely the Wean and Yearling weight and correlate to there EPD's and there offsprings EPD's(alongwith the sire). And look at their siblings.

If you don't understand what EPDs are designed to do, how can you tell they correlate to their EPDs?

I've buy Angus cattle that were high YW EPD and carry a calf that also had high WW and YW EPD's and they were inferior in weight to the CA.

CA? Chi-Angus? If so, you're getting hybrid vigor with that crossbred animal that you don't get with Angus. And you haven't identified what "high" YW means.

That Angus calf had a highWW EPD and but was 100 lbs lighter in ADJ 205 than the CA's born the same day. Can't give and EPD that would mean anything. But then we get all the other breeds in there and that 100 lbs heaveir CA's may not be so great when compared to other bigger breeds. So this goes back to why the AAA is not to keen on an across breeds EPD. Apples to apples. Their high EPD cattle would not be on the top any more. It's all numbers. People get to facinated by formulated numbers and not hard facts. How simple it would be if the YW EPD was a weight number of what the estimated weight would be not a number that signifies nothing but so much from 0 what ever 0 is. If the AAA says that an EPD can not give a wieght estimate then it's all a blur of oh 100 plus EPD is the best over any breed. Why because people are familiar with the AAA numbers. Which is fine, if people know the AAA EPD's. Which like Ollie says the AAA is the standard.

Now you're ranting. I consider myself a better than average Angus breeder, but know dozens just like me and I'm not at all concerned about Angus not having the highest EPD numbers. I'll bold this for you: There are no good or bad EPDs. Some people consider a milk EPD of 15 bad; personally, a cow with that works fine on my grass based program. If you're breeding Continental heifers, you might want a BW EPD of -2. Since I know the EPDs on my Angus, I can use bigger BW EPDs which usually correlate with more muscle and heavier WW and YW. EPDs are not a magic wand. They are a tool for Angus breeders to use. I'll bold this one, too: If other breed associations want reliable EPDs, get to work reporting data.

I never under estimate the commercial cattleman because I am one. I know the boots they wear. Where conditions aren't easy and need to get as much out of their cattle with the least cost. Their the ones that reley on that once a year pay check to survive.

Interesting. I've found that the commercial cattlemen who know the most about EPDs tend to be those actually making their living in ranching. They've embraced them as a tool to help improve their bottom line. The smaller, part time breeders who can't/won't pay more than $1200 for a bull are less interested in learning about them.

I wish I could sometimes go play at breeders functions, but not something I can do or afford.

The AAA runs seminars across the us when a new EPD comes out; they don't cost much. Are you a member of your state Angus Association? Some of those hold very informative meetings on a regular basis. I belong to several Angus groups. The meetings are fun and often informtive. You state Ag university may have programs to help you understand EPDs. They may charge for lunch or something like that, but otherwise, they're a great cheap resource.

I know a lot of commerical cattlemen that don't take EPD's to heart to much. Especially for me after seeing how much the higher EPD cattle let me down when I looked at EPD's and how the middle of the line EPD cattle were great- listening to the numbers jargon over the years of how good those cattle will be when they have such and such EPD. Of course, breeds should as much as they can get the sibbling information to their prospective association. Which I do for both the AAA and ACA and pay the yearly dues for both asssociations.

Since you don't understand EPDs, your comment that the higher EPD cattle let you down is not logical or likely.

Theres honest and crooked in every breed giving in their information. This happend with a few of the females I got. Those cattle were the poorest doers and producers of calves, but yet they are the one of the big names that ahh cattlemen to buying there stock. But lose many each year also.

You're right, there are honest and crooked in every breed. But, again, I think Angus has the advantage just because of sheer numbers. While there are some big operations that I wouldn't buy cattle from, there are others who have been around for generations and plan to be for more generations.

Cattlemen want hard facts

Cattlemen do want hard facts. And the hard fact is that EPDs are not a silver bullet. There are no silver bullets.

... wean and yearling weights and of herd siblings and what conditions they were raised in and what feed they got fed and how long and the siblings slaughter information. Things that an EPD is supose to signify, but doesn't do straight forward.

The conditions cattle are raised in has nothing to do with EPDs. EPDs are based on contemporary groups. A contemporary group is a group of at least two calves, born within 90 days and raised, managed, the same.

EPDs are very simple. You have a set of cows. They are what they are. You have a management program and grass. They are what they are. EPDs will simply tell you that if you breed those cows to a bull with a WW EPD of 50, you should EXPECT the calves from each cow to weigh 50 more pounds at weaning than if you bred those cows to a bull with a 0 WW EPD. That's it. That's what EPDs do.
 
greenwillowherefords":1v50r00u said:
I have a specific question for Frankie, Txag, Amazed, and any other die-hard EPD fans. I ask this honestly, and not with any intent to be a smart-aleck or unfriendly:

If you were searching for a replacement heifer or bull, and you had a choice between an animal that looked better, had better performance, and at least as good carcass data, but lower EPDs, and an animal that had higher EPDs but nothing else was as good, which would you choose? Add to this equation that the lower EPD animal's siblings had consistently ratioed better in the herd than the higher EPD animal's siblings. As you know, it takes a lot of data to move EPDs, and this scenario is very possible; indeed, I have seen it.

Well, of course, I cheat; we AI everything and generally don't use a bull until we've seen some offspring that peformed well on test. But I guess if I had to choose, I'd pick the bull with good EPDs. Research has shown over and over that EPDs are many times better indicators of a bull's potential than his own performance. And performance is very management related. "looked better" is in the eye of the beholder. EPDs take into consideration the performance of a bull's siblings. If I'm looking at cows, today I'd pick by pedigree. And this is all considering all the animals were sound, etc.
 
Frankie":18y2pq8z said:
Many associations have asked the ................................. That's what EPDs do.

Very well said!
Didn't want to make a huge post that's why I dotted out the middle part. I still don't understand why there is so much difficulties with the whole concept.
Another handy tool for those that AI are the Genetic Trait Summarys (that's the ABS term, but all of the studs have them) that provides a quantitive value for each trait. If you're looking to moderate FS, even if a particular bull is a FS 6, his offfspring may lean to FS 7, the GTS will provide that information. But it's like EPDs, it's not bullet proof, but just another tool. Individual animal performance and ratios are also just tools.
The cow is still half and sometimes more of the equation.
But that's just one OPs opinion.

dun
 
ollie":28q532xd said:
Frankie if you want to know what I HATE about epd's go to the the "all you hereford guys" here in the breed board and read the first post. People use epd's this way all the time . They acutally use them this way in my opinion more often than the "correct way" you guys are always talking about.I guess the good thing about people using epd's this way is it eliminates the competition in the seedstock industry.

I'll take time to look at it, Ollie. But I don't think EPDs are eliminating the competition in the Angus business. :D I think there's always room for one more. Breeding good cattle takes a lot of time. When a young man (generally) shows up here wanting to buy Angus cattle and start a seedstock program, I will either him my best cattle and advice. We bought our share of sorry Angus early on because they were cheap. Today I encourage youngsters to buy the best they can afford (even if they have to buy fewer head) and start an AI program. IMO, that's the only way to be profitable in the Angus business.
 

Latest posts

Top