Moderate Frame

Help Support CattleToday:

Son of Butch

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
2,902
Location
Frost Bite Falls, Minnesota
What does height have to do with anything?
No way a long legged skinny no butted cow is better then a shorter legged, properly structured wide barrel shaped cow.
leg length and height correlates to stature, with long = tall and shorter = short

I do agree with the insightful comment, that a properly structured cow is better than one that is not.
 

Ky hills

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2016
Messages
4,910
Reaction score
3,561
Location
Clark County, KY
When we commonly had 10 and 11 frame bulls across the spectrum of breeds in the 80’s, it was inevitable that moderation was needed. Moderate frame became the new buzzword. By this point in time I believe the term needs to be reassessed as it’s definitely not what it once was. At this point, when I hear the word moderate used to describe a bovine, I automatically write it off as being too short for most situations.
I have no problem with having smaller framed cows, in fact I’d prefer it. The markets here want calves with frame, and to achieve that you pretty much have to push the boundaries to the larger end of what would traditionally be considered moderate framed cows, and use bulls that are towards the larger frame end too.
I’ve taken straight Angus calves to market from contemporary AI lines and got clobbered because the calves were seen as short and fleshy.
Probably going to again this time around on some heifers calves as I’ve used a smaller framed bull than I usually would.
 

faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
730
Reaction score
1,081
Location
NE WY
Something that is worth remembering. When you use a smaller-framed bull (call him moderate if you wish) on a larger framed cow, you will get: 1 like the sire; 1 like the dam; and 1 in the middle. That's why it takes awhile for change to happen in the cowherd.

FWIW.
 

Stickney94

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2018
Messages
360
Reaction score
137
Location
SW MN
By this point in time I believe the term needs to be reassessed as it’s definitely not what it once was. At this point, when I hear the word moderate used to describe a bovine, I automatically write it off as being too short for most situations.

Agreed. I wish an actual yearling height measurement was as easy to find as the BW epd. Lesson learned though -- I won't use a bull unless I know actual data on yearling and mature height.

Why? Because, in my experience taller=longer & taller=better finishing weight (both lbs and less amt of overall fat cover)

They don't need to be 7 frame. But a consistent 6 frame would be good.
 

simme

Old Dumb Guy
Joined
Jul 7, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
2,750
Location
South Carolina
I still see ads that state a particular bull will "moderate frame". " Moderate" (noun) implies middle of the road. "Moderate frame" (moderate used as a verb) became a term years ago when people decided that 8+ frames were too big. At that time, a 6 frame bull would probably reduce (moderate) the frame of many cows. That is not likely today. Now, a 6 frame bull might increase the frame or at least maintain frame. The phrase is still used today when the average cow may be a 5 to 6 frame. That "moderate frame" meaning is dated now. Better to just publish the actual frame scores and let people decide for themselves. But hard to find that information on some bulls.

Matings generally produce an animal somewhere between the sire and dam in traits. But, there are outliers toward the ends of the probability curve that don't fit the average. Those are the animals that can make more rapid change - for better or worse. That is how we went from 3 and 4 frame to 8 and 10 frame - well that and some other genetic infusions perhaps.

Then there is the "improve feet" thing. Improve from what - pitiful, very bad, little bad, or OK?
 

Ky hills

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2016
Messages
4,910
Reaction score
3,561
Location
Clark County, KY
Agreed. I wish an actual yearling height measurement was as easy to find as the BW epd. Lesson learned though -- I won't use a bull unless I know actual data on yearling and mature height.

Why? Because, in my experience taller=longer & taller=better finishing weight (both lbs and less amt of overall fat cover)

They don't need to be 7 frame. But a consistent 6 frame would be good.
I’ll agree with that. When I was still trying to fool with AI, I wanted an Angus bull to be 6 frame or darn close, nothing less than 5 1/2 for sure and at that time that was dang hard to find. I would not mind a 7 frame bull at all under the right circumstances, but yes 6 is a good standard fit for my outfit.
 

Rmc

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
549
Reaction score
769
To me height has little if anything to do with weight or width.
Its like trying to figure shoulder width and weight of people by asking how tall they are.
 

Rmc

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
549
Reaction score
769
Something that is worth remembering. When you use a smaller-framed bull (call him moderate if you wish) on a larger framed cow, you will get: 1 like the sire; 1 like the dam; and 1 in the middle. That's why it takes awhile for change to happen in the cowherd.

FWIW.
Not necessarily .phenotype doesnt always equal genotype. Especially these days when only a small percentage of linebreeding is done,and many pedigrees look like a breeder directory.
 

Son of Butch

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
2,902
Location
Frost Bite Falls, Minnesota
To me height has little if anything to do with weight or width.
Its like trying to figure shoulder width and weight of people by asking how tall they are.
Haven't you been to a doctor's office?
These days they have scales for both height and weight.

A breed association that collects data on mature height and weight, but doesn't release it seems bordering on useless or at least has a lot of room for improvement.

p.s.
There is a direct correlation between yearling height and yearling weight.
 
Last edited:

kenny thomas

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
12,927
Reaction score
3,767
Location
SW tip of Virginia
To me height has little if anything to do with weight or width.
Its like trying to figure shoulder width and weight of people by asking how tall they are.
I can agree with how it should be but a calf weighting 450 that brings $2.00 a lb will bring 1.30 if it's short. Not worth the risk.
 

Rmc

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
549
Reaction score
769
p.s.
There is a direct correlation between yearling height and yearling weight.
So every single yearling that is the same height will be the exact same weight.?
Not even close even among the same breed you can have in excess of 30% weight variation for the same height
 

Son of Butch

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
2,902
Location
Frost Bite Falls, Minnesota
So every single yearling that is the same height will be the exact same weight.?
Not even close even among the same breed you can have in excess of 30% weight variation for the same height
The height weight correlation has been documented on 100s of thousands of cattle of all breeds for many, many decades. If you don't understand individual deviation from the norm then there is no point in continuing this conversation.

So how's the weather in your neck of the woods?
Cool weather here and planting schedule is behind due to cold soil temps
but this weekend we are expected to have our 1st day above 70 degrees this year.
 

SPH

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
657
Reaction score
52
Location
Iowa
I still see ads that state a particular bull will "moderate frame". " Moderate" (noun) implies middle of the road. "Moderate frame" (moderate used as a verb) became a term years ago when people decided that 8+ frames were too big. At that time, a 6 frame bull would probably reduce (moderate) the frame of many cows. That is not likely today. Now, a 6 frame bull might increase the frame or at least maintain frame. The phrase is still used today when the average cow may be a 5 to 6 frame. That "moderate frame" meaning is dated now. Better to just publish the actual frame scores and let people decide for themselves. But hard to find that information on some bulls.

Matings generally produce an animal somewhere between the sire and dam in traits. But, there are outliers toward the ends of the probability curve that don't fit the average. Those are the animals that can make more rapid change - for better or worse. That is how we went from 3 and 4 frame to 8 and 10 frame - well that and some other genetic infusions perhaps.

Then there is the "improve feet" thing. Improve from what - pitiful, very bad, little bad, or OK?
Good description! Drives me nuts that when someone uses the term "moderate" that it means something different to everyone now days so it's really hard to use that term without knowing what the person you are discussing it with thinks it means. One guy thinks moderate is a 4 frame, another guy thinks its a 5 frame and then probably some who even say 6 is moderate I would guess.

My definition of moderate is probably somewhere around a 5 to mid 5 frame score. Anything lower than a 5 then I start to define it as a smaller frame. Most of our cows our somewhere between a 5-6 frame score, we have a few that are 6+ but I would consider our cow herd mostly "moderate framed" cows while some maybe consider that a normal size I guess. In our environment and management practices a more moderate size cow probably is more efficient than a larger frame cow too.
 

Muletrack

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2017
Messages
213
Reaction score
192
I hear you all, but my experience is that the taller the cow, the shorter the time she produces in my herd. I have to find a cow that gets the job done in my environment. It is tough to find a cow under 1500 lbs. these days in my state. Yes, the cull price is good, but my goal is to have more old cows, and fewer culls.
 

Lee VanRoss

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
1,915
As in humans, animals, cattle in this instance do not inherit DNA traits in equal percentages. In fact some traits may not be inherited at all
and thereby lost to that particular offspring. While cookie cutter offspring does happen in families it is not the norm in either cattle or kids.
So to think your new bull is going to solve your problem of size variation can be an exercise in futility. Moderate or large frame cattle are
not the result of what the American housewife or restaurateur wants or expects it is the result of the packers and fabricators unilateral control
of the labor market. The more weight per unit that can be laid on the back of the worker the greater the profit per unit. I submit not one of
a hundred producers of medium or large frame cattle could hold up their end in a packing or fabrication environment on a day to day basis.

The packing industry by all laws of nature are compelled to process the product available to them. Increasing the size per unit of production
(larger cattle) without regard to the its effect on labor is a zero sum game that will spell the death of the industry as we have known it.
 

faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
730
Reaction score
1,081
Location
NE WY
As in humans, animals, cattle in this instance do not inherit DNA traits in equal percentages. In fact some traits may not be inherited at all
and thereby lost to that particular offspring. While cookie cutter offspring does happen in families it is not the norm in either cattle or kids.
So to think your new bull is going to solve your problem of size variation can be an exercise in futility. Moderate or large frame cattle are
not the result of what the American housewife or restaurateur wants or expects it is the result of the packers and fabricators unilateral control
of the labor market. The more weight per unit that can be laid on the back of the worker the greater the profit per unit. I submit not one of
a hundred producers of medium or large frame cattle could hold up their end in a packing or fabrication environment on a day to day basis.

The packing industry by all laws of nature are compelled to process the product available to them. Increasing the size per unit of production
(larger cattle) without regard to the its effect on labor is a zero sum game that will spell the death of the industry as we have known it.
I just had a conversation yesterday with a fellow in charge of a feedlot. He says they are killing cattle that weigh 1800# and he has yet to figure out why.

In another breed of cattle that we used bulls to crossbreed; we bought a quarter of a beef from the breeder. A steak wouldn't fit on the plate, it was that big. That changed our mind about using that breed for crossbreeding. Housewives don't want steaks that big!!

I just bought some rib steaks at the store because they were on sale. Rib steaks, bone in, $6.77/lb. 3 to a package and you could only buy 1 package. There is a story about that, and yes they can track it, because you have to click on it on the store app and put your phone number in when you check out, in order to get that price. The cost for 3 ribeye steaks on sale was about $10 each. I talked to a guy who was getting some and he said he used to work there. He asked me, "have you seen the price of crab legs?" I don't buy them so I didn't know what they cost. He told me, "$60/lb. When I worked here they were $15/lb. I'm a working man and I won't be eating crab legs." I was happy he had bought the ribeyes. No comparison in my mind. It was a bit of an enlightening conversation.
 

simme

Old Dumb Guy
Joined
Jul 7, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
2,750
Location
South Carolina
Moderate or large frame cattle are not the result of what the American housewife or restaurateur wants or expects it is the result of the packers and fabricators unilateral control
of the labor market.

The packing industry by all laws of nature are compelled to process the product available to them. Increasing the size per unit of production
(larger cattle) without regard to the its effect on labor is a zero sum game that will spell the death of the industry as we have known it.
What do you consider moderate and what is large? 4 frame for moderate? Is 6 large? 5?

What is ideal weight/frame of a cow in your area?

I recently attended the Clemson bull test sale. I remember an angus bull that had good gain, wda and performance. But he was about a 4.5 frame if I remember correctly. Bidding was slow and he sold about $2000 less than comparable larger frame bulls.

Remember the angus elephant ads of the 80's? They were afraid of losing bull sales to larger breeds. Those "large" breeds are much more "moderate" now, but I suspect that many angus have increased their weights since 1984.

Elephant
Still a lot of variation in cattle due to individual preferences, local environments, numbers of players in the chain, variety of marketing methods and many ownership changes and pricing points . Each player works based on his selling pricing at the next point in the chain, not the end product. Chicken and pork are now very consistent in size, efficiency, and quality. Decisions for chicken and pork are made based on end product and final profitability. Beef cattle don't fit that integration, but it would be nice if there was more consistency in the product and more predictable rewards.
 

Ebenezer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
586
Location
Piedmont of SC
What do you consider moderate and what is large? 4 frame for moderate? Is 6 large? 5?

What is ideal weight/frame of a cow in your area?

I recently attended the Clemson bull test sale. I remember an angus bull that had good gain, wda and performance. But he was about a 4.5 frame if I remember correctly. Bidding was slow and he sold about $2000 less than comparable larger frame bulls.

Remember the angus elephant ads of the 80's? They were afraid of losing bull sales to larger breeds. Those "large" breeds are much more "moderate" now, but I suspect that many angus have increased their weights since 1984.

View attachment 16455
Still a lot of variation in cattle due to individual preferences, local environments, numbers of players in the chain, variety of marketing methods and many ownership changes and pricing points . Each player works based on his selling pricing at the next point in the chain, not the end product. Chicken and pork are now very consistent in size, efficiency, and quality. Decisions for chicken and pork are made based on end product and final profitability. Beef cattle don't fit that integration, but it would be nice if there was more consistency in the product and more predictable rewards.
Today, the modern Angus deserve to have tusks and a trunk. Too bad that the AAA forgot the lesson and ignored history.
 

Rmc

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
549
Reaction score
769
I just had a conversation yesterday with a fellow in charge of a feedlot. He says they are killing cattle that weigh 1800# and he has yet to figure out why.

In another breed of cattle that we used bulls to crossbreed; we bought a quarter of a beef from the breeder. A steak wouldn't fit on the plate, it was that big. That changed our mind about using that breed for crossbreeding. Housewives don't want steaks that big!!
That is why many are cutting out the feeder and packer.
Moderate size cows fit what the consumer wants. Are more feed efficient and finish sooner.
Many are making more profit selling direct to the consumer with moderate sized feed efficient cattle.
Yet you see many attack that here day after day. Yet the same post about how it is hard to make money and the packers control the market.
Isn’t the definition of insanity “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results ?”
Next year ,I am sure I will make money next year. Or the number of cows is decreasing so prices will be up in a few more years and I will make money then.
 

Latest posts

Top