New Herd Bull

[lgfarms]

Give your opinion on the quality of this bull and weaknesses that I might need to look for in his offspring. Thanks.

+14357924

 

[Jake]

He looks good size wise from birth all the way through growth. He's moderate in all traits and is excellent for that. His $EN is horrid, you'll have to tie a sack of corn to his head. He also has a Neg. Scrotal which I'm not too hot about because it indicates issues with fertility.

 

[Larry Sansom]

He looks good size wise from birth all the way through growth. He's moderate in all traits and is excellent for that. His $EN is horrid, you'll have to tie a sack of corn to his head. He also has a Neg. Scrotal which I'm not too hot about because it indicates issues with fertility.

Good summary - seems somebody just bred to the "hot bull of the month club" for several generations. Now we have a hard doing bull with a fancy pedigree and his daughters will be hard doing, if they get bred.

 

[lgfarms]

He looks good size wise from birth all the way through growth. He's moderate in all traits and is excellent for that. His $EN is horrid, you'll have to tie a sack of corn to his head. He also has a Neg. Scrotal which I'm not too hot about because it indicates issues with fertility.

Good summary - seems somebody just bred to the "hot bull of the month club" for several generations. Now we have a hard doing bull with a fancy pedigree and his daughters will be hard doing, if they get bred.

I knew he wouldn't be an easy keeper when we got him, and had similar concern about keeping replacements. However, I never realized that neg scrotal caused breeding problems with heifer offspring. Could you guys elaborate more on this aspect?

 

[bwranch]

- seems somebody just bred to the "hot bull of the month club" for several generations.

Yep, 1407 x EXT. Hard doers and "Hot Bull of the month." There's some hot bull here but it's not in the pedigree. I don't care for the low scrotal #'s, but it depends on what your herd looks like. Milk is high but that could be good or bad depending on what you need. The $EN to me is not horrid, it's just not good. I think that balancing the $EN against your grass is important. For me, a $-7 is not that bad in a bull, because we have pretty good carrying capacity. $EN is still an unproven tool to me, although I will admit that the performance of most of my cows seems to track the $EN pretty well. His carcass #'s are pretty darn good versus most of the herd bulls I see, and WW and YW are quite acceptable. Based on Epd's, I think you'll do OK.

Now I know that Doc says we should base our primary judgement on the Epd's, but since I never do what I'm told, does he "look" good? Phenotype comes from those little gene thingys too and gets passed on, just like fertility and carcass.

Lee

 

[lgfarms]

Now I know that Doc says we should base our primary judgement on the Epd's, but since I never do what I'm told, does he "look" good? Phenotype comes from those little gene thingys too and gets passed on, just like fertility and carcass.

Lee

I don't have any pictures, but he is very sound phenotypically speaking. Not a world beater, but a very nice looking animal. I'll try to get a couple pictures and post them in this thread.

Thanks for your input.

 

[TSR]

- seems somebody just bred to the "hot bull of the month club" for several generations.

Yep, 1407 x EXT. Hard doers and "Hot Bull of the month." There's some hot bull here but it's not in the pedigree. I don't care for the low scrotal #'s, but it depends on what your herd looks like. Milk is high but that could be good or bad depending on what you need. The $EN to me is not horrid, it's just not good. I think that balancing the $EN against your grass is important. For me, a $-7 is not that bad in a bull, because we have pretty good carrying capacity. $EN is still an unproven tool to me, although I will admit that the performance of most of my cows seems to track the $EN pretty well. His carcass #'s are pretty darn good versus most of the herd bulls I see, and WW and YW are quite acceptable. Based on Epd's, I think you'll do OK.

Now I know that Doc says we should base our primary judgement on the Epd's, but since I never do what I'm told, does he "look" good? Phenotype comes from those little gene thingys too and gets passed on, just like fertility and carcass.

Lee

He must get the hard keeping from 1407 because my EXTs are pretty easy keepers and I must say that the hardest keeper I have is an 036 daughter with a BCC Bushwacker daughter running her a close second. I do agree those $EN numbers have been right on with respect to the catle I have seen. I am constantly amazed at how the epd's are so accurate.
Regarding the scrotal, look at your cows' sires, I have used some smaller scrotal bulls epd wise, whose male progeny had very good scrotal (39 cm at one year) JMHO.

 

[bwranch]

Just to clarify, the first couple of sentences in my previous reply should be taken as a sarcastic response, especially regarding the bull of the month comment to which I referred.

Lee

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Now I know that Doc says we should base our primary judgement on the Epd's, but since I never do what I'm told, does he "look" good? Phenotype comes from those little gene thingys too and gets passed on, just like fertility and carcass.

Lee

I don't have any pictures, but he is very sound phenotypically speaking. Not a world beater, but a very nice looking animal. I'll try to get a couple pictures and post them in this thread.

Thanks for your input.

lgfarms - If you can get pictures, please get side view, AND rear veiw. That give us a two dimensional aspect, which helps view phenotype. His production #s are only fair, with the exception of BW. AND Scrotal. I know that fertility can be influenced by later matings to more desirable figures, but THIS is the bull you have, and THIS is the bull who is siring your next calf crop, and THIS is the bull who has NEGATIVE ( -.34 ) Scrotal EPD's. YOU are the one who has to contend with that fact in your next calf crop if you are going to retain replacement heifers!

His Maternal EPD's are pretty good - Milk is higher than I like generally, however that is typical of 1407 daughters. By comparison with other bulls in the breed currently, I think his Carcass numbers are lousy, with the exception of Marbling. Ultrasound figures are okay. $Values are well within reason except $EN, and that indicates additional feed expenses on your part in the future. May not be a problem to you considering his other virtues, and of course, your COWS EPD's! The biggest error that I have found in talking to breeders regarding choices of Bulls is they neglect to take into consideration the EPD's OF their COWS!!! "A GOOD bull is half of your herd. A POOR bull is your ENTIRE herd for as long as you keep his Replacements!" Same thing goes for your cow herd.

And, LEE, you are lurching toward putting words in my mouth. I have never minimized the importance of Phenotype. I just emphasize and accentuate EPD considerations in the overall BALANCE of selection.

DOC HARRIS

 

[bwranch]

Sorry Doc, I just couldn't resist. It was meant in jest and references the discussion on the other thread regarding the good phenotype/bad Epd vs. bad phenotype/good
Epd discussion. I don't really believe you would ignore phenotype, and I certainly do not advocate ignoring as useful a tool as epd's. In my previous post I mentioned carcass #'s were pretty good, my bad, I meant the ultrasound #'s were pretty good. I don't ignore carcass data, but I tend to think ultrasound is a more reliable predictor of meat quality. Good carcass data is hard to find. In the real world, I still feel like that bull will hold his own. He won't be a superstar, but as long as he's not a tent butted, sway backed wash out, his overall Epd's are not bad.

Lee

 

[Jake]

Now I know that Doc says we should base our primary judgement on the Epd's, but since I never do what I'm told, does he "look" good? Phenotype comes from those little gene thingys too and gets passed on, just like fertility and carcass.

Lee

I don't have any pictures, but he is very sound phenotypically speaking. Not a world beater, but a very nice looking animal. I'll try to get a couple pictures and post them in this thread.

Thanks for your input.

lgfarms - If you can get pictures, please get side view, AND rear veiw. That give us a two dimensional aspect, which helps view phenotype. His production #s are only fair, with the exception of BW. AND Scrotal. I know that fertility can be influenced by later matings to more desirable figures, but THIS is the bull you have, and THIS is the bull who is siring your next calf crop, and THIS is the bull who has NEGATIVE ( -.34 ) Scrotal EPD's. YOU are the one who has to contend with that fact in your next calf crop if you are going to retain replacement heifers!

His Maternal EPD's are pretty good - Milk is higher than I like generally, however that is typical of 1407 daughters. By comparison with other bulls in the breed currently, I think his Carcass numbers are lousy, with the exception of Marbling. Ultrasound figures are okay. $Values are well within reason except $EN, and that indicates additional feed expenses on your part in the future. May not be a problem to you considering his other virtues, and of course, your COWS EPD's! The biggest error that I have found in talking to breeders regarding choices of Bulls is they neglect to take into consideration the EPD's OF their COWS!!! "A GOOD bull is half of your herd. A POOR bull is your ENTIRE herd for as long as you keep his Replacements!" Same thing goes for your cow herd.

And, LEE, you are lurching toward putting words in my mouth. I have never minimized the importance of Phenotype. I just emphasize and accentuate EPD considerations in the overall BALANCE of selection.

DOC HARRIS

Now, now Doc, you don't necessarily want a bull with +120 YW, we're not breeding moose here. A bull with those numbers should be moderately framed yet growth.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Mike -

:???: :???: :???: YW - +120 ?! I think you should check your eyesight! N-o-o-o-o-t Eg-Zackly! Where did you come up with that figure??? Not from anything I have ever advocated.

DOC HARRIS

 

[Jake]

Mike -

:???: :???: :???: YW - +120 ?! I think you should check your eyesight! N-o-o-o-o-t Eg-Zackly! Where did you come up with that figure??? Not from anything I have ever advocated.

DOC HARRIS

I just came up with that number out of nowhere Doc. I'm saying that that bulls growth numbers are actually fairly ideal for a commercial operation without the big $$ to put into the cattle that the animals with YW of +95. It wasn't in this post, but I could have sworn that somewhere you've said something about a bull with similar growth EPDs wasn't growthy enough, but I am probably mistaken, It is quite common anymore.

 

[Beef11]

GridMaker i think is around 119 for YW. I think it's Gridmaker atleast. In my opinion high YW can be a good thing but i look at growth versus frame i'll take a frame 6 with a 95 yw way before i take a frame 7 with 95yw because he demonstrates that he has growth genes as opposed to size genes which we kind of mesh in with growth genes in our current epd system. I should come up with a ratio system to calcuate that.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

I think the ratio idea is a good one! They ratio other "balance" traits and ideas, why not "Growth and Size"? Why don't you suggest that idea to the AAA and give them a challenge!?

DOC HARRIS

 

[Jake]

GridMaker i think is around 119 for YW. I think it's Gridmaker atleast. In my opinion high YW can be a good thing but i look at growth versus frame i'll take a frame 6 with a 95 yw way before i take a frame 7 with 95yw because he demonstrates that he has growth genes as opposed to size genes which we kind of mesh in with growth genes in our current epd system. I should come up with a ratio system to calcuate that.

WONDERFULLY SAID!