Longevity or Lack of It

[greenwillowherefords]

Looking through some AI ads the other day, I noticed a couple of very popular bulls, one a '96 model and one a '98 model that were listed as deceased. If the deaths were not unfortunate accidents, then I would be hesitant to breed to a bull that didn't last any longer than that, especially considering the pampered stud life that top AI bulls lead. I select for genetics with 12 and 15 year lifespans on the bulls personally.

 

[1848]

My wife has taken quite a few years from me....I think I can relate! :shock: Don't mean I'm no good though. I sired some great offspring!

hehehe..... :lol:

 

[Ryan]

I agree that longevity is very important. You mentioned that some '96 & '98 models were already deceased and it is a shame, especially if not from some sort of accident. The two senior herdsires at the ranch I work for are 96 & 98 models and both look like they have many good years ahead of them. Also, the matriarch of our herd is an March 1985 model, she looks younger than many cows of our cows that are 10 years younger, has a great udder, and raises really good calves every year.

 

[1848]

I'm not sure my last post came out right...... :shock:

 

[1848]

I think longevity is important. I also think if the bull didn't last long due to leg/feet problems then that is a big minus! Some bulls have been put down cause their legs don't hold up. Heart conditions can be hereditary, but are more forgiven. Lots of feed for many years can ruin a good bull too. I at least like to see bulls which were run in pastures for a period of time. Not just kept in a barn and given magazines about cows to read... ;-)

 

[jkwilson]

My take on bull longevity is that it really doesn't indicate much, especially for the top sires. They are being pushed hard with feed from birth on so they stay looking good.
A better indication to me is the longevity of the cows he comes from and his daughters. Usually, you won't know how long the bull will last when it's time to use him, nor will you know how his daughters will hold up, but you may have a good idea of how his dam and grand-dams hold up.

 

[Frankie]

Looking through some AI ads the other day, I noticed a couple of very popular bulls, one a '96 model and one a '98 model that were listed as deceased. If the deaths were not unfortunate accidents, then I would be hesitant to breed to a bull that didn't last any longer than that, especially considering the pampered stud life that top AI bulls lead. I select for genetics with 12 and 15 year lifespans on the bulls personally.

You should also consider genetic improvements. I hope that every generation of cattle we raise here is better than their dams. I won't use a really old Angus bull because he's not going to perform as well as younger bulls. "Old" being Pine Drive and Pierre age and "young" being EXT, 036, 602C ages. I generally won't jump out and use unproven bulls and that takes a few years, but in the Angus breed, at least, we've improved performance considerably in the last 10-15 years. Of course, commercial cattlemen can't afford to turn their cow herd every few years, but they can buy good bulls and keep heifers to improve the genetics in their herd.

 

[bulldealer]

...especially considering the pampered stud life that top AI bulls lead.Greenwillowherefords

Bulls in stud pampered? As a veteran of the AI industry, I can honestly say that the bulls that you see in the pictures of the AI magazines are not what the look like when they are in stud. They are fed a maintenence diet so that they do not get fat and can still produce semen, they generally have a small pen with maybe a very short exercise run. You would probably puke if you went to the bull stud expecting to see the bull that was in the picture. :cboy:

bulldealer
"Go Pokes"

 

[frenchie]

Longevity of the breeding female is one of the most under rated items in the selection of breeding stock..

As cull cows have very little value In Canada now...it is an aspect we have looked at in our cattle operation,when buying new stock.

 

[1848]

Longevity of the breeding female is one of the most under rated items in the selection of breeding stock..

As cull cows have very little value In Canada now...it is an aspect we have looked at in our cattle operation,when buying new stock.

Sorry to hear about the repercussions on your end. Good to see a breeder always using their head, by taking the negative, applying it to their program and making it positive!

 

[greenwillowherefords]

Looking through some AI ads the other day, I noticed a couple of very popular bulls, one a '96 model and one a '98 model that were listed as deceased. If the deaths were not unfortunate accidents, then I would be hesitant to breed to a bull that didn't last any longer than that, especially considering the pampered stud life that top AI bulls lead. I select for genetics with 12 and 15 year lifespans on the bulls personally.

You should also consider genetic improvements. I hope that every generation of cattle we raise here is better than their dams. I won't use a really old Angus bull because he's not going to perform as well as younger bulls. "Old" being Pine Drive and Pierre age and "young" being EXT, 036, 602C ages. I generally won't jump out and use unproven bulls and that takes a few years, but in the Angus breed, at least, we've improved performance considerably in the last 10-15 years. Of course, commercial cattlemen can't afford to turn their cow herd every few years, but they can buy good bulls and keep heifers to improve the genetics in their herd.

I am all for the genetic improvements, but I want proven traits behind them. For example, I purchased a bull recently who has cutting edge bloodlines IMO, but he has a number of proven performers in his pedigree, including a bull that bred cows into his fifteenth year. I'm not very knowledgable about the latest and greatest in the Angus camp, but I know a thing or two about who's who among Herefords. And I know that OXH Mark Domino 8020 is still competitive across the spread, and his daughters are highly prized. He is about 13 or 14. Feltons 517 needs no introduction and his sons and grandsons are among the top young bulls available today. I'm of the opinion that a cow who will raise you a live healthy calf to weaning every year without problems, wean a calf between five and seven hundred pounds, and do it for fifteen years, will make you more money in the long run than cows that last three to five years and wean 800# calves. Now if you have cows that last nine years or longer and wean 800# calves, that's all the better. If I had a cow family that was shipping at five or six years old, and they were raising the top weaning weights in the herd, I'd breed them to an 8020 to try to add more longevity to them.

 

[1848]

I won't use a really old Angus bull because he's not going to perform as well as younger bulls.

I don't understand this? Many of the old bulls that are around, are because they have been proven to work (in most cases) "Genetics" may be in the younger bull, but they are a long way from being proven! I don't want to take a chance breeding everything I have with a new yearling every year, year after year, just because I like his pedigree on paper. Granted this is how many older bulls start, but why reinvent the wheel. That's what EPD's are for, and the dams you say you want behind the bull? There are good bulls that made those dams (these dams have also "had to prove themselves" to you over time...right?) This is why people line breed. to keep prepotency in the blood lines.

but in the Angus breed, at least, we've improved performance considerably in the last 10-15 years.

You are sounding a little biased here? Many other breeds have made considerable advances in performance in the last 10-15 years...at least..

Did I read this wrong? or did you mean "speaking for Angus only"

 

[1848]

I think "frenchie" made a good point in this forum where frenchie indicated:...due to Canada's sluff in prices (because of the trade across the border restrictions), they have had to reevaluate their herd and look at longevity. This will help prevent them from being killed in the sale barn when times like they are having make it more feasible to hang on to the cattle instead of taking a heavy discount on them.

 

[frenchie]

I think "frenchie" made a good point in this forum where frenchie indicated:...due to Canada's sluff in prices (because of the trade across the border restrictions), they have had to reevaluate their herd and look at longevity. This will help prevent them from being killed in the sale barn when times like they are having make it more feasible to hang on to the cattle instead of taking a heavy discount on them.

Just my opinon... but I believe longevity is a direct result of superior fertility within that particular cow.Without fertility nothing else matters.

As a result of the cull cow prices....I find myself selecting more bulls that are out of dams that are 12 to 13 yrs of age...

 

[J. Zeagler]

Ensign Ranches in Utah is a really large commercial operation that breeds their own bulls. They do not retain a bull or female out of a cow less than 7 years old. Obviously this would not be feasible for a purebred operation but I found their strategy to be interesting. They aren't just doing "lip service" in terms of longevity - they are walking the walk.

 

[Frankie]

I won't use a really old Angus bull because he's not going to perform as well as younger bulls.

I don't understand this? Many of the old bulls that are around, are because they have been proven to work (in most cases) "Genetics" may be in the younger bull, but they are a long way from being proven! I don't want to take a chance breeding everything I have with a new yearling every year, year after year, just because I like his pedigree on paper. Granted this is how many older bulls start, but why reinvent the wheel. That's what EPD's are for, and the dams you say you want behind the bull? There are good bulls that made those dams (these dams have also "had to prove themselves" to you over time...right?) This is why people line breed. to keep prepotency in the blood lines.

What don't you understand? I watch feed tests results across the US. Generally speaking, EXT, 036, Grid Maker bulls will outperform Pine Drive, New Trend bulls. That's a fact. Sure those old bulls show up in some of my cow's (and bull's) pedigrees. They were good bulls in their time. That's how you improve a breed, by using the best genetics available at the time. Almost half the Angus calves registered last year were a product of AI. I stated very clearly that I won't use unproven bulls, though I am very greatful to breeders who are willing to jump out and prove (or dis-prove) them. So you're arguing something I didn't say. Does that make you feel good? Some people linebreed and that's their choice. Line breeding takes more years to establish than I expect to have left in the cattle business. Plus, being a small breeder, I can't afford to haul half my calf crop to the sale barn for several years. I'll minimize my chances of that by using proven bulls and daughters of proven bulls. I've seen more than one line bred herd dispersed over the last few years and they didn't sell all that well. Since my focus is to make money, I'll use genetics proven by other breeders.

but in the Angus breed, at least, we've improved performance considerably in the last 10-15 years.

You are sounding a little biased here? Many other breeds have made considerable advances in performance in the last 10-15 years...at least..

Of course I'm biased. I raise Angus cattle. I don't know if other breeds have improved themselves over the last 10-15 years, though, frankly, some breeds seem to have just incorporated Angus (or Red Angus) into their genetics and called that an improvement.

Did I read this wrong? or did you mean "speaking for Angus only"

Gee, I thought I was clear so I'll say it another way: Angus breeders have spent a lot of time and money over the last 10-15 years identifying and using bulls that will perform. The current MARC research tends to bear out my claim.

 

[1848]

Ensign Ranches in Utah is a really large commercial operation that breeds their own bulls. They do not retain a bull or female out of a cow less than 7 years old. Obviously this would not be feasible for a purebred operation but I found their strategy to be interesting. They aren't just doing "lip service" in terms of longevity - they are walking the walk.

That is in direct contrast to some seedstock and commercial operations who won't keep anything past 7 years! I suppose they think their best productive years are over, and they might as well get them sold or shipped before they lose value. I am suprised at the amount of larger seedstock operations that sell off their supposedly proven females (upper half of the herd and retain only the new heifers or young cows coming up.
It seems to me that there is more to prove than just revamping your herd for genetics purposes. I would think that the EPD accuracy values associated with the older animals could only help your direction. Why throw all that data away and start over.

I realize alot of the younger females hold those older animals genetics in their bloodlines, but why not finish what you start. It tends to give indications that the old generation didn't work instead of them thinking they are giving everybody else an opportunity.. :roll: Why not sell the young ones who should reflect the best of everything you have to offer (with proof in the background). The young ones will not only make more money by age alone, but they should also have a more sellable pedigree in line with current trends?

 

[1848]

Frankie, (You don't have to yell)

Sorry Folks, this is a very long response, but I feel I must defend my honor…

I watch feed tests results across the US. Generally speaking, EXT, 036, Grid Maker bulls will outperform Pine Drive, New Trend bulls. That's a fact. Sure those old bulls show up in some of my cow's (and bull's) pedigrees. They were good bulls in their time.

Performance begins at calving. These bulls you refer to I don't know, but I can say that a 65 lb calf will "typically" not out-perform an 85 lb calf given same growing conditions and similar or equivalent milking ability of the mommas. I do know that if you look at a lot of the new Angus sires you will see that their BW's and the BW's of their calves are considerably larger than what used to be typical of "old" Angus, so the newer bulls would have an advantage this way. Whether it is a desirable trait for seed stock breeders depends on the program. I suppose in a terminal cross I would want pounds, and it sounds as though you are more a terminal breeder anyway since your focus is to "make money".

Since my focus is to make money, I'll use genetics proven by other breeders.

Not to say we all don't want to make money, but I tend to believe the terminal cross is the most "efficient" way to do this.

They were good bulls in their time.

Good bulls in their time are "time tested". You indicated you used "proven young bulls", but in order for a bull to prove his offspring will make desirable replacements, and not just a good terminal animal, (which is what a lot of new bulls calves are evaluated as) his daughters and sons must be evaluated with at least 3 to 5 years of "production" (not age) under their belts. This would make the bull "at least" 5 to 6 years old, assuming he was used as an "unproven" yearling. Based on most of these great young bulls not even getting used naturally until they are 3 years old (due to show, and the need to collect heavily) they haven't even proved "their own" longevity traits in the pasture until they are 7 or 8! So, it sounds like you should be grateful to yourself for proving these young sires.

Ensign Ranches in Utah is a really large commercial operation that breeds their own bulls. They do not retain a bull or female out of a cow less than 7 years old.

Almost half the Angus calves registered last year were a product of AI. I stated very clearly that I won't use unproven bulls, though I am very greatful to breeders who are willing to jump out and prove (or dis-prove) them.

This brings me to another question. If ½ the animals in the AAA were AI'd, then which bulls are proving over time that their females will have longevity? Especially considering that these AI bulls are for the most part penned and not used to "chase" cows or forage for food on their own two feet 24 hours a day! Perhaps this is where the Angus breeders are making a mistake. Maybe the "popularity" of the Angus bull is directly related to the fact that they don't "last" in the pasture? Is this a problem, yes! Terminal cross breeders (the biggest users of Angus bulls) may have to buy a lot of Angus bulls out of necessity, not because they are "just good".

So you're arguing something I didn't say. Does that make you feel good?

I am not arguing with you. I indicated I did not understand the mentality of your breeding program. "I am learning too". Does this learning make me "feel good"..Yes! Frankly Frankie, I don't give a "dangus"…about Angus in particular, or have any desire to "argue" your point, although it appears here that I have been placed at bat! I try to look at breeding stock in general and what makes sense for seed stock and commercial breeders without being too biased towards my own breed. Many buyers of my bulls are not breeding the same breed, and it is important that I know what they need so I can focus on my customer.

Some people linebreed and that's their choice. Line breeding takes more years to establish than I expect to have left in the cattle business.

As far as line breeding? I thought the whole purpose of line breeding is to set up prepotency, and that this is the quickest and most efficient means of doing this without proven sires!

I can't afford to haul half my calf crop to the sale barn for several years. I'll minimize my chances of that by using proven bulls and daughters of proven bulls.

I would hope that if you are a "seed stock" breeder, and you are breeding animals for replacements and pedigrees, (out of proven bulls and daughters of proven bulls) that you "are" hanging onto your stock for the right market, and for the sake of breed improvement. If not, then running your calves through the sale barn tells me that you lean more towards a terminal program and it is understandable why you are not a big proponent of longevity.

I don't know if other breeds have improved themselves over the last 10-15 years, though, frankly, some breeds seem to have just incorporated Angus (or Red Angus) into their genetics and called that an improvement.

If you don't know how other breeders are improving themselves then how do you know your breed (or herd) is far superior? You have nothing to compare with! I would think that eating my own cooking all the time would get old and drab. You say some breeds are incorporating Angus, and if you know this then you must admit that other breeds are willing to improve…despite them only humbling themselves to the great Angus.

Of course I'm biased. I raise Angus cattle.

I try not to be biased. I believe we can learn from all breeds, breeders, and practices. I was reading the posts from members and guest under the recent Topic called: "MARC is it Bull?" I noticed your comment was biased. It was also very interesting to see everyone else's opinion in regards to MARC, especially the GURU La4angus.

but in the Angus breed, at least, we've improved performance considerably in the last 10-15 years.

You are sounding a little biased here? Many other breeds have made considerable advances in performance in the last 10-15 years...at least..

Of course I'm biased. I raise Angus cattle. I don't know if other breeds have improved themselves over the last 10-15 years, though, frankly, some breeds seem to have just incorporated Angus (or Red Angus) into their genetics and called that an improvement.

Did I read this wrong? or did you mean "speaking for Angus only"

Gee, I thought I was clear so I'll say it another way: Angus breeders have spent a lot of time and money over the last 10-15 years identifying and using bulls that will perform. The current MARC research tends to bear out my claim.

One thing stuck out in that document concerning the MARC research. It was this statement at the beginning of the research: Breed differences in performance characteristics are an important genetic resource for improving efficiency of beef production ", and this statement at the end and summarization of the research: "No one breed excels in all traits that are important to beef production. Crossbreeding systems that exploit heterosis and complementarity and match genetic potential with market targets, feed resources and climates provide the most effective means of breeding for production efficiency".

"No one breed excels in all traits that are important to beef production". I think that says it all.

I'll let you have the last word in this. I have no desire to argue my point of view……

I just have it!

 

[frenchie]

Ensign Ranches in Utah is a really large commercial operation that breeds their own bulls. They do not retain a bull or female out of a cow less than 7 years old. Obviously this would not be feasible for a purebred operation but I found their strategy to be interesting. They aren't just doing "lip service" in terms of longevity - they are walking the walk.

Is that the Mormon owned ranch?

 

[Frankie]

Frankie, (You don't have to yell)

I'm not yelling. Yelling is ALL CAPS. Bold is for emphasis. I don't want you to miss any of what I consider important points since you seem to be trying to put words in my mouth.

Sorry Folks, this is a very long response, but I feel I must defend my honor…

Hey, I posted an opinion about how longevity is related to genetic improvement and you jumped in the middle of it. Now you claim to be defending your honor :?:

Performance begins at calving.

These bulls you refer to I don't know, but I can say that a 65 lb calf will "typically" not out-perform an 85 lb calf given same growing conditions and similar or equivalent milking ability of the mommas.

Performance may begin at calving, but the genetic ability to perform is bred into the animal. A favorite saying of the extension officer who used to run our OK Steer feed out was "you can mismanage a calf from Prime to Select; but you can't manage a calf from Select to Prime." It's the same with other traits.

I do know that if you look at a lot of the new Angus sires you will see that their BW's and the BW's of their calves are considerably larger than what used to be typical of "old" Angus, so the newer bulls would have an advantage this way. Whether it is a desirable trait for seed stock breeders depends on the program. I suppose in a terminal cross I would want pounds, and it sounds as though you are more a terminal breeder anyway since your focus is to "make money".

It depends on which Angus sires you're looking at. Looking at the Angus Sire Summary, in 1972, the average BW reported in the AHIR program for Angus bull calves was 69 lbs. In 2003 (the latest date in the Sire Summary, it was 81 lbs.; we've added 12 lbs to the average BW of Angus calves reported in the AHIR program. Same table of info, same Sire Summary: in 1972 the average WW of an Angus bull calf was 477 lbs; 2003 it was 640. Since 1972, on average, we've added 163 lbs of weaning weight for 12 lbs of birthweight. Without digging out AHIR reports, I know that my BWs are average, or less, but my WWs are higher than average most years. This year, we're calving out a lot of heifers, so I may not have those higher WWs. I call that an improvement in performance. You may not be in the cattle business to make money, but I am and most of the people buying my bulls seem to be intersted in that aspect, too. I wouldn't call myself a "terminal" breeder. There are quite a few cows in this country sired by my bulls. My neighbor to the south has been running one of my bulls for 5-6 years now and he keeps heifers. I try to raise fertile, sound bulls with balanced EPDs that will also perform in the feedlot.

Not to say we all don't want to make money, but I tend to believe the terminal cross is the most "efficient" way to do this.

Well, the extension folks can show us on paper where it's more economical to buy replacements, but most people I know raise their own.

Good bulls in their time are "time tested". You indicated you used "proven young bulls", but in order for a bull to prove his offspring will make desirable replacements, and not just a good terminal animal, (which is what a lot of new bulls calves are evaluated as) his daughters and sons must be evaluated with at least 3 to 5 years of "production" (not age) under their belts. This would make the bull "at least" 5 to 6 years old, assuming he was used as an "unproven" yearling. Based on most of these great young bulls not even getting used naturally until they are 3 years old (due to show, and the need to collect heavily) they haven't even proved "their own" longevity traits in the pasture until they are 7 or 8! So, it sounds like you should be grateful to yourself for proving these young sires.

We can argue all day about what the term "proven" means. Generally, I look at an EPD accuracy of over .85 for an Angus bull before I'll use him. I also go to a lot of bull sales and evaluate sons of bulls that I'm considering using. I like to see daughters, too, but am not able to see as many of those. But I talk to other Angus breeders at sales and get an idea of how daughters are working out of bulls that I'm considering. I'm still using the older bulls Krugerrand and EXT. They're solid proven bulls that will compete with any younger bull. Several years ago, I saw an Alliance group buy the right to flush a high dollar Angus cow. They chose to flush her to AAR New Trend, an old bull who shows up in a lot of popular current Angus sires. I saw a bull test report that showed the performance of some of the bull calves out of that flush. They were aveage performers. I assumed they were flushing to get some cows and I hope they were successful.

This brings me to another question. If ½ the animals in the AAA were AI'd, then which bulls are proving over time that their females will have longevity?

The Angus Association is following the Red Angus people in working on a logvevity EPD. Personally, I'm not particuarlly interested in one. IMO, mnagement has as much to do with how long a cow will be productive as her genetics.

Especially considering that these AI bulls are for the most part penned and not used to "chase" cows or forage for food on their own two feet 24 hours a day!

Again, you have to look at the particular bull. Many of those AI bulls are collected, then sent home to work in the pasture. Also, reference the post earlier about the stresses on them while at stud.

Perhaps this is where the Angus breeders are making a mistake. Maybe the "popularity" of the Angus bull is directly related to the fact that they don't "last" in the pasture?

Boy, after seeing the prices being paid for Angus bulls in East Texas, I hope we can keep making this "mistake." Something like 97% of the ranchers responding to an Angus survey say they plan to buy an Angus bull this year. The US cow herd is finally growing. Nothing works better on a heifer than an Angus bull with reliable EPDs. And producers are keeping those Angus heifers, so they need another bull.

Is this a problem, yes!

In your mind, not in mine.

Terminal cross breeders (the biggest users of Angus bulls) may have to buy a lot of Angus bulls out of necessity, not because they are "just good".

Show me some facts that prove the biggest users of Angus bulls are terminal cross breeders. Here in OK, Angus sired heifers out sell everything else at the replacement heifer sales that I've seen. And they're generally bred to a "calving ease Angus bull." The OK Cattlemen's group has a replacement female sale every fall and almost everything sold is black; heifers known to be sired by Angus are generally the highest selling. Yes, you can get a terminal Angus bull if you want, but those Angus cows are very popular, at least in my area.

I am not arguing with you. I indicated I did not understand the mentality of your breeding program.

Hopefully, you understand me a bit better.

"I am learning too". Does this learning make me "feel good"..Yes! Frankly Frankie, I don't give a "dangus"…about Angus in particular, or have any desire to "argue" your point, although it appears here that I have been placed at bat! I try to look at breeding stock in general and what makes sense for seed stock and commercial breeders without being too biased towards my own breed. Many buyers of my bulls are not breeding the same breed, and it is important that I know what they need so I can focus on my customer.

You're right to focus on your customer's needs.

As far as line breeding? I thought the whole purpose of line breeding is to set up prepotency, and that this is the quickest and most efficient means of doing this without proven sires!

You'll need to talk to a line breeding guru and that's not me. But I don't believe it's "quick" to line breed. When you line breed, you bring out the good traits, but you also bring out the bad traits. A serious line breeder will take those bad ones to the sale barn. I think it's very difficult to pass on a linebred herd to another producer, either through inheritance or a sale.

I would hope that if you are a "seed stock" breeder, and you are breeding animals for replacements and pedigrees, (out of proven bulls and daughters of proven bulls) that you "are" hanging onto your stock for the right market, and for the sake of breed improvement. If not, then running your calves through the sale barn tells me that you lean more towards a terminal program and it is understandable why you are not a big proponent of longevity.

It only tells you that if you have your mind made up already. I am in the business of producing Angus bulls for commercial cattlemen. When one of them doesn't make the "cut", they usually go to the sale barn. When a heifer or cow doesn't breed or raises a sorry calf, she goes to the sale barn. We sold an Angus bull to the neighbor this year that didn't make the "cut." He was looking for a calving ease bull and knows the calf got sick on test, plus he knows our program and is happy with the bulls he's bought from us in the past. I've also had people pull us out of the sale barn line and ask to buy bulls we've got in the trailer.

If you don't know how other breeders are improving themselves then how do you know your breed (or herd) is far superior? You have nothing to compare with! I would think that eating my own cooking all the time would get old and drab. You say some breeds are incorporating Angus, and if you know this then you must admit that other breeds are willing to improve…despite them only humbling themselves to the great Angus.

I don't think I've said Angus is "far superior." I have a long list of feed test stations across the US that feed all breeds of bulls. Would you like to have it? I have watched the Angus ADG and WDA go up over the years, while some breeds have gone down or remained the same. I get out to other breed sales several times a year.

I try not to be biased. I believe we can learn from all breeds, breeders, and practices. I was reading the posts from members and guest under the recent Topic called: "MARC is it Bull?" I noticed your comment was biased. It was also very interesting to see everyone else's opinion in regards to MARC, especially the GURU La4angus.

Everyone has an opinion. I try to learn from other breeds and breeders. I said earlier that I'm not a big fan of MARC, but I do like the lastest info on Angus they're publishing. So maybe I'll learn to like them. ;-)

One thing stuck out in that document concerning the MARC research. It was this statement at the beginning of the research: Breed differences in performance characteristics are an important genetic resource for improving efficiency of beef production ", and this statement at the end and summarization of the research: "No one breed excels in all traits that are important to beef production. Crossbreeding systems that exploit heterosis and complementarity and match genetic potential with market targets, feed resources and climates provide the most effective means of breeding for production efficiency".

"No one breed excels in all traits that are important to beef production". I think that says it all.

I'll let you have the last word in this. I have no desire to argue my point of view……

I just have it!

MARC is highly regarded in many circles. There's no getting away from the value of heterosis. But the beef industry has changed greatly over the last few years and will continue to do so. If you didn't read the article here at CattleToday about the changes, you should try to find it in the archives. Let me know if you want me to find it for you. Alliances and branded beef programs are going to demand more specialized genetics. I think the best way to fill those demands will be with straightbred cattle. Laura's Lean has been paying a premium for straightbred Limousin cattle for years. We know cattle sired by an Angus bull are more likely to hit the CAB target. The PGA branded beef program is taking off in my area. Bradley's Angus beef program has been bought out by Coleman's "natural" beef and they're looking for a specifically bred animal.