Lowlines

[DOC HARRIS]

BRANDONM2 - NOVATECH - GUEST 25 - AND ALL CATTLETODAY MEMBERS Please re-read my post on page 5. Misunderstanding on your part - BIG apology on MY part!

DOC HARRIS

 

[Brandonm2]

There is only ONE original breeder.......the large research station down in Trangie Australia. Both sets of cattle descend from Angus purchased in 1929. They sold off the Lowlines and they are now scattered all over the world. Here is a link to the Canadian Assn http://www.canadianlowline.com/beef.htm
As far as I know you would need to contact the research station about the status of and plans (if any) for the Highline Angus.

 

[Brandonm2]

BRANDONM2 - NOVATECH - GUEST 25 - AND ALL CATTLETODAY MEMBERS Please re-read my post on page 5. Misunderstanding on your part - BIG apology on MY part!

DOC HARRIS

No need for you too apologize. Apparently we were the ones misreading your post.

 

[novatech]

BRANDONM2 - NOVATECH - GUEST 25 - AND ALL CATTLETODAY MEMBERS Please re-read my post on page 5. Misunderstanding on your part - BIG apology on MY part!

DOC HARRIS

Thank you I have done this more than once myself.

 

[KMacGinley]

Couple of thoughts:

More Knowledgable about Cattle.... Doc or Guest25? Gotta go with Doc.

Doc has raised cattle all his life, Doesn't have any now. Guess when he sold the last one, all that knowledge evaporated.


Corn is going to get higher and higher in price.

Feeding large framed cattle corn is not going to be efficient.

Cattle that gain on Forage, which is what they are intended to do anyway, are going to be the ticket.

Smaller framed cattle gain better, more efficiently on higher forage diets.


More cows per acre, weaning chunky 4 and 5 frame 550 lb calves always makes more money than behemoth 1600 lb cows weaning 650 lb calves. Why?

1. more calves weaned... less calving difficulty
2. lighter calves higher price
3. Cows last longer.... less weight, less stress on feet and legs etc.
4. Calves being smaller framed will fatten more easily on a byproduct/forage regime with less corn in the mix.

Talk all you want about Larger Framed "More feed efficient"
cattle, but the feed that you think they are going to be more efficient on is going to be priced out of your reach.

 

[ALACOWMAN]

Couple of thoughts:

More Knowledgable about Cattle.... Doc or Guest25? Gotta go with Doc.

Doc has raised cattle all his life, Doesn't have any now. Guess when he sold the last one, all that knowledge evaporated.


Corn is going to get higher and higher in price.

Feeding large framed cattle corn is not going to be efficient.

Cattle that gain on Forage, which is what they are intended to do anyway, are going to be the ticket.

Smaller framed cattle gain better, more efficiently on higher forage diets.


More cows per acre, weaning chunky 4 and 5 frame 550 lb calves always makes more money than behemoth 1600 lb cows weaning 650 lb calves. Why?

1. more calves weaned... less calving difficulty
2. lighter calves higher price
3. Cows last longer.... less weight, less stress on feet and legs etc.
4. Calves being smaller framed will fatten more easily on a byproduct/forage regime with less corn in the mix.

Talk all you want about Larger Framed "More feed efficient"
cattle, but the feed that you think they are going to be more efficient on is going to be priced out of your reach.

I think guest25 has the knowledge. he just needs to let the angus deal go and share more of what he does know

 

[novatech]

Couple of thoughts:

More Knowledgable about Cattle.... Doc or Guest25? Gotta go with Doc.

Doc has raised cattle all his life, Doesn't have any now. Guess when he sold the last one, all that knowledge evaporated.


Corn is going to get higher and higher in price.

Feeding large framed cattle corn is not going to be efficient.

Cattle that gain on Forage, which is what they are intended to do anyway, are going to be the ticket.

Smaller framed cattle gain better, more efficiently on higher forage diets.


More cows per acre, weaning chunky 4 and 5 frame 550 lb calves always makes more money than behemoth 1600 lb cows weaning 650 lb calves. Why?

1. more calves weaned... less calving difficulty
2. lighter calves higher price
3. Cows last longer.... less weight, less stress on feet and legs etc.
4. Calves being smaller framed will fatten more easily on a byproduct/forage regime with less corn in the mix.

Talk all you want about Larger Framed "More feed efficient"
cattle, but the feed that you think they are going to be more efficient on is going to be priced out of your reach.

Feed efficient cattle have been shown to be efficient on what ever is given them, grass or grain.

And one more time, statements that are meant to sound like facts don,t make them facts. I have asked for research data that backup your claims but as of yet have not seen any.
Data that I have read indicates that feed efficiency is an individule trait not a size trait.

 

[Bluestem]

This post has been run into the ground. Guess I'll add my shovel full.
You're not going to properly finish a steer/heifer in a reasonable amount of time/money with a 1400# plus momma. Smaller animals in the 50's early 60's equaled a higher percentage grading prime? I'm experimenting with Lowline cross to see if I can increase % of prime grade on grass. My long range plans carry me into my second lifetime

 

[ALACOWMAN]

Couple of thoughts:

More Knowledgable about Cattle.... Doc or Guest25? Gotta go with Doc.

Doc has raised cattle all his life, Doesn't have any now. Guess when he sold the last one, all that knowledge evaporated.


Corn is going to get higher and higher in price.

Feeding large framed cattle corn is not going to be efficient.

Cattle that gain on Forage, which is what they are intended to do anyway, are going to be the ticket.

Smaller framed cattle gain better, more efficiently on higher forage diets.


More cows per acre, weaning chunky 4 and 5 frame 550 lb calves always makes more money than behemoth 1600 lb cows weaning 650 lb calves. Why?

1. more calves weaned... less calving difficulty
2. lighter calves higher price
3. Cows last longer.... less weight, less stress on feet and legs etc.
4. Calves being smaller framed will fatten more easily on a byproduct/forage regime with less corn in the mix.

Talk all you want about Larger Framed "More feed efficient"
cattle, but the feed that you think they are going to be more efficient on is going to be priced out of your reach.

Feed efficient cattle have been shown to be efficient on what ever is given them, grass or grain.

And one more time, statements that are meant to sound like facts don,t make them facts. I have asked for research data that backup your claims but as of yet have not seen any.
Data that I have read indicates that feed efficiency is an individule trait not a size trait.

novatech i know you like too say that theres times that your mouth get's ahead ahead of your brain. this is one time i have too agree with you. all the money you spend on proven animals will not buy the experiance some of these folks have. they make claims from just that... experiance.. no university test can match it

 

[MikeC]

Feed Efficiency has little to do with size. IMHO

It involves too many little known about factors:

Body Temperature

Saliva Production

Rate of Metabolism

Stomach Wall Area

Endocrine Glands

Pituitary Glands

Etc. Etc. Etc.

Why is it that in a bull test that has tested 1000's of bulls for the last 40 years the Charolais have been the most efficient over the Angus and Hereford but were always bigger?

The evidence is also overwhelming that cattle that are more efficient on grain are also more efficient on grass.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Need to rename this board to the Who can Pee farther..board.

IMO has very little to do with the breed you pick as much as the management of the breed.

Pis poor management yields poor cattle no matter the breed.

 

[Brandonm2]

I don't think this is ever going to be settled in a debate here. Only trial and error and who lasts in this business is going too decide which phenotype of cattle is best. I am a little disappointed though that after ~9000 years of cattle ranching and ~300 years of scientific cattle breeding that AT LEAST 11 frame scores of cattle STILL have their champions within the beef biz.

 

[ALACOWMAN]

I don't think this is ever going to be settled in a debate here. Only trial and error and who lasts in this business is going too decide which phenotype of cattle is best. I am a little disappointed though that after ~9000 years of cattle ranching and ~300 years of scientific cattle breeding that AT LEAST 11 frame scores of cattle STILL have their champions within the beef biz.

id like to add though. im not gonna debate with a man what cattle i think would work best in his area. weather its west texas,idaho, new york if he's been at it a awile he should be well aware. ive always lived in the south and youll see a mix of every thing. even seen highlander some hobbist brought in that wound up razor thin from the heat. you can't convert feed well if you not tolerent of the area

 

[Brandonm2]

I don't think this is ever going to be settled in a debate here. Only trial and error and who lasts in this business is going too decide which phenotype of cattle is best. I am a little disappointed though that after ~9000 years of cattle ranching and ~300 years of scientific cattle breeding that AT LEAST 11 frame scores of cattle STILL have their champions within the beef biz.

id like to add though. im not gonna debate with a man what cattle i think would work best in his area. weather its west texas,idaho, new york if he's been at it a awile he should be well aware. ive always lived in the south and youll see a mix of every thing. even seen highlander some hobbist brought in that wound up razor thin from the heat. you can't convert feed well if you not tolerent of the area

Obviously, cattle in Montana need more hair and backfat than do cattle in Alabama. Somebody in Guatemala probably needs less hair, a thicker hide, and more Brahman blood than most of us would recommend here. Environmental variation is not the primary reason for the VAST diversity in American cattle though. At some point, pride of ownership and raw stubborness takes over. Are 1800 lb cows too large??? Are 600 lb mini cows too small??? I would probably answer YES to both questions; but then I am no more authority than the people who are championing those extremes. At some point economics are going to take over and the market and environment will dictate what we can make money at and what won't.

 

[ALACOWMAN]

I don't think this is ever going to be settled in a debate here. Only trial and error and who lasts in this business is going too decide which phenotype of cattle is best. I am a little disappointed though that after ~9000 years of cattle ranching and ~300 years of scientific cattle breeding that AT LEAST 11 frame scores of cattle STILL have their champions within the beef biz.

id like to add though. im not gonna debate with a man what cattle i think would work best in his area. weather its west texas,idaho, new york if he's been at it a awile he should be well aware. ive always lived in the south and youll see a mix of every thing. even seen highlander some hobbist brought in that wound up razor thin from the heat. you can't convert feed well if you not tolerent of the area

Obviously, cattle in Montana need more hair and backfat than do cattle in Alabama. Somebody in Guatemala probably needs less hair, a thicker hide, and more Brahman blood than most of us would recommend here. Environmental variation is not the primary reason for the VAST diversity in American cattle though. At some point, pride of ownership and raw stubborness takes over. Are 1800 lb cows too large??? Are 600 lb mini cows too small??? I would probably answer YES to both questions; but then I am no more authority than the people who are championing those extremes.

• At some point economics are going to take over and the market and environment will dictate what we can make money at and what

won't.

heck thats already here .

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Hey Doc - just read your revised post on page 5 - you can come out of the corner now!!!
Wasn't sure what you were referring to on the original post - but I just ignored it.