Lowline angus bull in pic - any good?
- Thread starter WAguy
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Well, isn't low good? I mean, that's where the grass is, and I don't eat the legs. 
Did bulls in the 50's weigh 1200 pounds or so like this one? Or were they today's size but just shortened legs?
Don't know that we're coming full circle, unless you figure with acreages becoming smaller like mine, people might want smaller cows in their back yard.
Was just reading about this bull who is in Australia (semen available here). He's supposedly won "every major show in Australia". So, hopefully that's good, unless they judge differently.
Did bulls in the 50's weigh 1200 pounds or so like this one? Or were they today's size but just shortened legs?
Don't know that we're coming full circle, unless you figure with acreages becoming smaller like mine, people might want smaller cows in their back yard.
Was just reading about this bull who is in Australia (semen available here). He's supposedly won "every major show in Australia". So, hopefully that's good, unless they judge differently.
Santas and Duhram Reds
Well-known member
actually, I prefer this type of angus compared to the angus of today. The R. angus bull we used on some of our santa cows was of this order.
DOC HARRIS
Well-known member
Inasmuch as it is late tonight, I will say only this:NO! If he has been winning all over Australia, they are breeding a kind of phenotype that I wouldn't even give 3 seconds thought to duplicating. No level hindquarter, and pinched at the pins. Observe how close together his hind feet are placed! As far as that old "cutsie" remark about where the grass is, and not eating the legs, - - I thought that went out of usage in about 1963!
We had better all pray that we don't "go back" to the 1950's in our phenotype selection! Once was W-a-a-ay MORE than enough of that kind of krap!
Uninformed breeder's can't stand prosperity! Thank God for what you have at this time in your life, and work within the accepted protocols to make significant changes for the better, but NOT toward THIS kind of animal!
DOC HARRIS
We had better all pray that we don't "go back" to the 1950's in our phenotype selection! Once was W-a-a-ay MORE than enough of that kind of krap!
Uninformed breeder's can't stand prosperity! Thank God for what you have at this time in your life, and work within the accepted protocols to make significant changes for the better, but NOT toward THIS kind of animal!
DOC HARRIS
Well, I was 4 years old in 1963, so wasn't paying much attention to cattle talk (nor did I for the next 40 years). Sorry if I've brought up bad memories. Just when I think I've come up with something original.....
These problems you mention, are they related to an effort to reduce size, i.e. can you make a much smaller line of cattle and not have these problems?
I don't understand the details, but sure makes you wonder how judges in Australia can not understand cattle. Do judges in America understand them? Are shows meaningless?
These problems you mention, are they related to an effort to reduce size, i.e. can you make a much smaller line of cattle and not have these problems?
I don't understand the details, but sure makes you wonder how judges in Australia can not understand cattle. Do judges in America understand them? Are shows meaningless?
Have a look at this site and decide just how original....
http://www.msu.edu/~ritchieh/historical/cattletype.html
I bet he would get around real well in the deep South Dakota snow!
Seriously, this breed is way to small, unless they are for pets. I mean, who are you going to sell this type of animal to? Plus this bull looks like he has bad back legs and maybe a hump in the back.
Seriously, this breed is way to small, unless they are for pets. I mean, who are you going to sell this type of animal to? Plus this bull looks like he has bad back legs and maybe a hump in the back.
Victoria
Well-known member
I always thought with shortness came thickness, obviously not according to this bull. I really don't care for him.
DOC HARRIS
Well-known member
KNERSIE! Bless you, my Boy! When my 'old' computer crashed a few weeks ago, I lost this website! And now you have allowed me to restore it to my "Favorites", so as to enable me to NEVER forget just how idiotic and ridiculous the cattle and "Show Styles" were back then! This is an Educational Opportunity for the younger Breeders of All Breeds to realize what supposedly "New Ideas" in cattle breeding can ultimately do to a common sense and practical plan for meat production when ignorance of the facts takes over logic and reason!KNERSIE":2h7augek said:
NEVER let it be said that something like this EVER happens again!
Low-down - Low-line - Low class - -Whatever - - NO WAY!
The same thought goes for "COW BEAUTY PARLORS"!
DOC HARRIS
dun":2w0t0bnk said:
Dun I agree, but as long as selection is based on functionality and not simply on a frame score with more 0's than the next guys cattle. Its the same with all the miniature breeds, all can play a role, but then the miniature breeders needs to get away from the idea that smaller is better.
If the goal was a frame 1 or 2 or for that matter even a frame 0 animal, then good, work towards a uniform group, but to strive for frame 0000 is just as ridiculous as the drive for a frame 10 animal twenty or so years ago
*Cowgirl*
Well-known member
Thanks Knersie. GREAT Site. I have always loved Dr. Ritchie's work.
From what I have read Lowline angus was an experiment where they picked out small frame cattle bred them to small frame bulls selecting the smaller frame as replacements this went on for about 50 years. When they decided to end the program they sold the cattle herd they found out there was a lot of interest in the lowline cattle, either hobby, pets or to raise their own freezer beef a lot of people wanted the lowline beef
Actually, when I said I didn’t come up with anything original, I was referring to my “cutsie†remark about lowlines being closer to the ground, etc. I was not referring to discovering a smaller type of cattle. I realize that there have been shorter cattle in the past.
However, when I look at some of the cattle in the website provided, I’m not sure if they look like the lowline bull above. Many are much shorter, one has a measuring stick at about 40 inches. And the 1949 photo below gives the height as about the same as the lowline, but a weight of over 1900 pounds (700 more). Maybe he’s just fat, but seems to be a big bull with the legs removed. Whereas the lowline looks more proportionate, just smaller.
Regarding the supposed problem with the hind legs on the lowline, can you really judge from one photo? I see a protuberance hanging out of his midsection, and wonder if he wasn’t up to something.
I am still curious why Australians don’t read the American journals to learn how a bull should look. Why would they give awards to a bull with so many defects?
However, when I look at some of the cattle in the website provided, I’m not sure if they look like the lowline bull above. Many are much shorter, one has a measuring stick at about 40 inches. And the 1949 photo below gives the height as about the same as the lowline, but a weight of over 1900 pounds (700 more). Maybe he’s just fat, but seems to be a big bull with the legs removed. Whereas the lowline looks more proportionate, just smaller.
Regarding the supposed problem with the hind legs on the lowline, can you really judge from one photo? I see a protuberance hanging out of his midsection, and wonder if he wasn’t up to something.
I am still curious why Australians don’t read the American journals to learn how a bull should look. Why would they give awards to a bull with so many defects?
Let’s look at the big picture. Like my brother in Montana who’s been offered megabucks from developers, more farms/ranches will be subdivided. Some people will want cattle for just a few acres. I am on just 5 acres in dry country without much pasture, so don’t want 1500 pound cows. I want two small ones. You could call them pets, since they have names, but I milk the Lowline/Jersey cross, and plan to eat her calf. We don’t need an 1800 pound steer.
It’s possible that I’m in the wrong crowd here. Probably hard for people with thousands of acres of commercial beef production to relate to the little guy who just wants alittle milk and meat.
I actually tried to make goats work, but they have that smell.
Another question. I’m just wondering how the correct size of animal is determined. I understand that large can be more efficient for handling and slaughter in large operations. But then why don’t sheep producers breed up to 1000 pound sheep?
I tried a Dexter cow and discovered she was a poor producer of both milk and meat. Some lines produce more milk, mine did not. So you’d think she’d be a great meat producer, but wasn’t. Scrawny calf. Which is why I went for the lowline/Jersey cross for some milk, then breed her to the larger end of lowlines for a beef calf. Here’s a picture of a Dexter bull I found. I’m guessing the lowline would be a better beef producer.
Bez>
Well-known member
WAguy":1a4ssze3 said:
Maybe not.
I used to be the first guy to poke fun at those small cattle types.
Now that I am sort of in contact with some folks that raise mini herfs - by the way - if he is reading - you owe me some pics buckaroo!
Met him through a horn question.
They now run about 150 head of mini herfs and make more money with them than I do on the big stuff.
Small is in for the fresh and new country folks on their 5 acre ranchette or farmette.
Eat them or make pets out of them - either way there is money to be had if the business is run right.
Plus I was truly surprized at how good the animals looked.
Bez+
Lowline cattle were developed by the NSW Department of Agriculture from registered Angus stock at their research centre in Trangie NSW Australia. The research centre was created in 1929 to provide quality Angus genetics to the NSW cattle industry. Seed stock were purchased from Scotland, Canada, America and selected Australian Studs to form the foundation of the herd. From 1929 to 1963 the Angus herd was prominent in the Australian showing circuit and won many major awards. The research herd was closed to outside genetics in 1964 after the purchase of herd sires from leading Australian Studs, Wambanumba, Glengowan, Tulagi and Wallah.
In 1963 the emphasis at Trangie was changed to scientific research in the form of performance recording. The project, involving weight gain, structural measurements, objective visual assessment and selective breeding, continued through to 1973 and pioneered performance testing in Australia today. The trial which produced the Lowline breed began in 1974, with funding from the Australian Meat Research Corporation, to evaluate selection for growth rate on herd profitability. The aim was to establish whether large or small animals were more efficient converters of grass into meat. This project continued for 19 years. The Trangie herd was divided into three groups based on yearling growth rates. The high yearling growth rate cattle were named High lines, the low yearling growth rate cattle were named the Low line and a randomly selected group was named the Control line. A program of detailed evaluation was implemented, which included weight gain, feed intake, reproductive performance, milk production, carcass yield and structural correctness. The protein conversion performances of the High line and the Low line cattle were monitored and recorded on an individual basis. The lines continued to grow apart with the selection process and recorded on an individual basis.
After 15 years the Low line of cattle were around 30% smaller than the High lines. The result of the efficiency in conversion was the same for the bulk of the Low and High line groups. The original Low line herd comprised 85 cows, which were joined to yearling bulls also selected for low growth from birth to yearling age. From 1974 the Low line herd remained closed, with all replacement bulls and heifers from within the Low line herd.
Towards the end of the trial a group of interested cattlemen persuaded the Department of Agriculture to sell the Low line of cattle on the open market. On the 8th of August 1992, 9 bulls, 23 heifers and 7 cows were sold to 7 purchasers. They then formed the Australian Lowline Cattle Association. The complete dispersal sale followed on October 30, 1993 where 20 bulls were sold, together with 44 cows and 51 heifers.
In 1963 the emphasis at Trangie was changed to scientific research in the form of performance recording. The project, involving weight gain, structural measurements, objective visual assessment and selective breeding, continued through to 1973 and pioneered performance testing in Australia today. The trial which produced the Lowline breed began in 1974, with funding from the Australian Meat Research Corporation, to evaluate selection for growth rate on herd profitability. The aim was to establish whether large or small animals were more efficient converters of grass into meat. This project continued for 19 years. The Trangie herd was divided into three groups based on yearling growth rates. The high yearling growth rate cattle were named High lines, the low yearling growth rate cattle were named the Low line and a randomly selected group was named the Control line. A program of detailed evaluation was implemented, which included weight gain, feed intake, reproductive performance, milk production, carcass yield and structural correctness. The protein conversion performances of the High line and the Low line cattle were monitored and recorded on an individual basis. The lines continued to grow apart with the selection process and recorded on an individual basis.
After 15 years the Low line of cattle were around 30% smaller than the High lines. The result of the efficiency in conversion was the same for the bulk of the Low and High line groups. The original Low line herd comprised 85 cows, which were joined to yearling bulls also selected for low growth from birth to yearling age. From 1974 the Low line herd remained closed, with all replacement bulls and heifers from within the Low line herd.
Towards the end of the trial a group of interested cattlemen persuaded the Department of Agriculture to sell the Low line of cattle on the open market. On the 8th of August 1992, 9 bulls, 23 heifers and 7 cows were sold to 7 purchasers. They then formed the Australian Lowline Cattle Association. The complete dispersal sale followed on October 30, 1993 where 20 bulls were sold, together with 44 cows and 51 heifers.
