Phenotype, Fancy, or productive.

[JHH]

I see it here on these boards almost everyday. Someone posts a pic then we tell them, it needs more muscle, its feet are terrible, to thin, to fat, ect.

Would you take productive ugly cows over very fancy good phenotype cows, or are they all culls in most of your minds.

Example. Cow probably weighs 975 and weans a 600 lb calf no creep but her feet are less than perfect but does not affect her, she is the wrong color ( ie. not black) she has horns. ect.

You all cant have fancy front pasture cows and no ugly ones.

Or trade her for a great looking cow with outstanding phenotype and very fancy.

I guess what I am trying to say is I would keep the ugly cow as long as she is productive. I have not seen the affect or had any negative problems from cow hocked, or pidgeon toe'd , Ect. ( not to sell bulls as seedstock or replacement heifers, just pounds at the barn)

What kind of problem would you expect to see from these type of cows? Take into account here that I am relativly new to this so please explain

I often wonder if what is pleasing to our eye is really what is the most productive.

 

[hillrancher]

If you are new to the business, you will take what will pay the bills. As you prgress keep the eye pleasers and the ones that will pay the bills better. This is the reason that the people that has been in the business for years have the better quality and eye pleasing heards.

 

[showing71]

20 years ago, we started with the ugly but productive cows in both the purebred and crossbreds. We're still working to better our herd (who isn't?), but now, we keep only a select few of the ugly crossbreds because they wean off great feedlot steers/heifers. The purebreds have fewer and fewer ugly ones, but just because they are getting prettier they don't get cut any slack on the production end. They still need to do their job. Even as we buy cows, we look at pedigrees and epds before even looking at the cows so we don't get swayed by one's phenotype. I believe if you work hard enough to find them or breed them, you can have the best of both worlds.

 

[sizmic]

I've used this line before but a very wise person told me, " Look at a cow that brings in a big strapping calf every year and learn to like what she looks like." I like the fancy ones too but it takes all kinds to make the world go 'round.

Sizmic

 

[CPL]

I have always thought that if you are going to select for certain traits you should know why you're selecting for them.

For instances you select for deeper ribbed, bolder sprung cattle in the hopes that they will more likely be easier fleshing.

You select for structurally correct cattle because they are more likely to have greater longevity.

You could go on with the traits, and yes there are going to be outliers in everything, but I think you still need to select for the productive traits.

Also I've often wondered about the answer to this question. Some of these "ugly" cows are producing heavy calves at weaning, but is the type that they are producing really what the industry needs? Should emphasis be placed on traits other than growth, like carcass merit for example? Isn't this why those commerical producers, with the genetics behind their stock, that retain ownership through the feedlot recieve higher premiums?

 

[Isomade]

I have always thought that if you are going to select for certain traits you should know why you're selecting for them.

For instances you select for deeper ribbed, bolder sprung cattle in the hopes that they will more likely be easier fleshing.

You select for structurally correct cattle because they are more likely to have greater longevity.

You could go on with the traits, and yes there are going to be outliers in everything, but I think you still need to select for the productive traits.

Also I've often wondered about the answer to this question. Some of these "ugly" cows are producing heavy calves at weaning, but is the type that they are producing really what the industry needs? Should emphasis be placed on traits other than growth, like carcass merit for example? Isn't this why those commerical producers, with the genetics behind their stock, that retain ownership
through the feedlot recieve higher premiums?

I agree. The reason that a fancy cow is considered fancy in the first place is because a larger number of cows that look like her are likely to be efficient, long lasting producers.

 

[TexasBred]

I have always thought that if you are going to select for certain traits you should know why you're selecting for them.

For instances you select for deeper ribbed, bolder sprung cattle in the hopes that they will more likely be easier fleshing.

You select for structurally correct cattle because they are more likely to have greater longevity.

You could go on with the traits, and yes there are going to be outliers in everything, but I think you still need to select for the productive traits.

Also I've often wondered about the answer to this question. Some of these "ugly" cows are producing heavy calves at weaning, but is the type that they are producing really what the industry needs? Should emphasis be placed on traits other than growth, like carcass merit for example? Isn't this why those commerical producers, with the genetics behind their stock, that retain ownership
through the feedlot recieve higher premiums?

I agree. The reason that a fancy cow is considered fancy in the first place is because a larger number of cows that look like her are likely to be efficient, long lasting producers.

Yep...don't make it "either/or when you can have both

 

[cbcr]

I have always thought that if you are going to select for certain traits you should know why you're selecting for them.

For instances you select for deeper ribbed, bolder sprung cattle in the hopes that they will more likely be easier fleshing.

You select for structurally correct cattle because they are more likely to have greater longevity.

You could go on with the traits, and yes there are going to be outliers in everything, but I think you still need to select for the productive traits.

Also I've often wondered about the answer to this question. Some of these "ugly" cows are producing heavy calves at weaning, but is the type that they are producing really what the industry needs? Should emphasis be placed on traits other than growth, like carcass merit for example? Isn't this why those commerical producers, with the genetics behind their stock, that retain ownership
through the feedlot recieve higher premiums?

I agree. The reason that a fancy cow is considered fancy in the first place is because a larger number of cows that look like her are likely to be efficient, long lasting producers.

Yep...don't make it "either/or when you can have both

I'm sure that some of you started with the ugly cow, we all have. But being selective on what you breed to, improvements can be made in each generation. Changes and improvements are more noticeable with A.I. be than with natural service, unless all the ugly cows are alike.

Producers do need to be selective about the traits they select for, the more traits that are selected though, the less improvement that can be seen. You are better off putting emphasis on a couple of traits at a time.

Carcass traits are (or should be important) but to many they aren't because all they are wanting to do is sell pounds of beef, their philosophy is not my problem. However, producers that retain ownership, carcass traits are very important.

Other things that producers need to be selective about is feed efficiency. With high grain prices and inputs, this is important to cow/calf producers.

The beef industry continues to change, prices go up and down, inputs continue to climb. Producers NEED to look for ways to add to their bottom line.

Genetics are very misterious, always have been and always will be. While some of those ugly cows may not be the prettiest, they may be better than you think.

 

[KNERSIE]

I have always thought that if you are going to select for certain traits you should know why you're selecting for them.

For instances you select for deeper ribbed, bolder sprung cattle in the hopes that they will more likely be easier fleshing.

You select for structurally correct cattle because they are more likely to have greater longevity.

You could go on with the traits, and yes there are going to be outliers in everything, but I think you still need to select for the productive traits.

Also I've often wondered about the answer to this question. Some of these "ugly" cows are producing heavy calves at weaning, but is the type that they are producing really what the industry needs? Should emphasis be placed on traits other than growth, like carcass merit for example? Isn't this why those commerical producers, with the genetics behind their stock, that retain ownership through the feedlot recieve higher premiums?

Very well put!

 

[novatech]

I have never been the best at seeing the fine details in phenotype/structural correctness. Knowing that I have always selected cattle from a long line of top show cattle back ground. You still have to be careful in doing that as trends change. At one time the giants were what was best. Another is when flat sided cattle were the trend. Using older bulls (semen) I found that the history (verbal & EPD's) was available to determine exactly what type of pasture animals I would end up with. Fertility being the #1 criteria, pretty or ugly.
I have herd a lot of remarks on the boards from people not wanting anything to do with show cattle. I spent a lot of time talking to judges at shows as to why they selected for certain traits. After having done that I completely reversed my long standing poor opinion of show cattle. After implementing what I learned and what I already new about productive cattle I ended up with a truly outstanding herd. There is really no excuse for not having correct phenotype and productive cattle. It is simply a matter of education, selection and culling. But it don't happen over night.

 

[JHH]

I have always thought that if you are going to select for certain traits you should know why you're selecting for them.

For instances you select for deeper ribbed, bolder sprung cattle in the hopes that they will more likely be easier fleshing.

You select for structurally correct cattle because they are more likely to have greater longevity.

You could go on with the traits, and yes there are going to be outliers in everything, but I think you still need to select for the productive traits.

Also I've often wondered about the answer to this question. Some of these "ugly" cows are producing heavy calves at weaning, but is the type that they are producing really what the industry needs? Should emphasis be placed on traits other than growth, like carcass merit for example? Isn't this why those commerical producers, with the genetics behind their stock, that retain ownership through the feedlot recieve higher premiums?

As Knersie said very well put. Just thinking again, I have my mind set as to what I want. Just wanted someone else's opinion.

For some reason I had completely dismissed carcass traits, thanks for bringing that up.

 

[dun]

For some reason I had completely dismissed carcass traits, thanks for bringing that up.

The trick is to define "carcass traits"! Are you looking for lean muscle or marbled muscle? There are markets for both. With the select/choice spread so variable and at times favoring one over the other (although it's usually choice being ahead even if it's only slightly ahead), your breeding decisions aren;t going to pay off for several years. And then it's only going to pay off if you retain ownership or at least partial ownership through to slaughter.

 

[backhoeboogie]

I agree with the pulse of responses here. Better to have good cows with the traits you want than ugly.

That said, if I can ever pick up ugly heavy bred cows dirt cheap again, I'd bid. There's been some decent S/S gals go for hamburger many times over the last few decades. I've gone to the sale barns with no intention of buying and had to come home and get the trailer a few times. Other times I've drug the trailer there and then back home empty.

Some ugly cows earn the most nickels in the pasture. They can go in the front or in the back.

Edit: as a matter of fact, I wish I had a 100 or so ugly cows already Calved out so that I could dump them at the sale right now.

 

[TexasBred]

I agree with the pulse of responses here. Better to have good cows with the traits you want than ugly.

That said, if I can ever pick up ugly heavy bred cows dirt cheap again, I'd bid. There's been some decent S/S gals go for hamburger many times over the last few decades. I've gone to the sale barns with no intention of buying and had to come home and get the trailer a few times. Other times I've drug the trailer there and then back home empty.

Some ugly cows earn the most nickels in the pasture. They can go in the front or in the back.

Edit: as a matter of fact, I wish I had a 100 or so ugly cows already Calved out so that I could dump them at the sale right now.

lol, if those "uglies" can just walk in the ring, they'll send you home smiling when it's over with these days.

 

[TB-Herefords]

your breeding decisions aren;t going to pay off for several years. And then it's only going to pay off if you retain ownership or at least partial ownership through to slaughter

For those that choose to stay in the buisness for several years they will see a higher demand for there calves from buyers through reputation of their genetics. True or False?

 

[dun]

your breeding decisions aren;t going to pay off for several years. And then it's only going to pay off if you retain ownership or at least partial ownership through to slaughter

For those that choose to stay in the buisness for several years they will see a higher demand for there calves from buyers through reputation of their genetics. True or False?

Not alwasy but frequently. It depends on what market the buyer is trying to fill. The only fly in the ointment is that it takes probably 5-6 years for the reputation to get aorund enough to have a demand for the producers specific cattle unless he can ship multiple pots a year. We've also run into the problem of the feedlot not having space when we're selling. We've been asked to hold the calves for another 60-90 days before there would be room. In those cases we've had a couple of buyers willing to take them right away, but that kind of reputation doesn;t come v=over night.

 

[Nesikep]

Well, on TBH's post, we've been doing this for 20 years, which isn't that long in the scale of things, but the buyers at the sale barn have started remembering us, and for a couple sales now we've fetched top price, or close to, for a particular weight class and sale... so I guess the calves they bought from us before were good

As for breeding and selection, I was about to start a very similar thread, with a list of traits to look for
I think 9 questions should cover most traits you look at

Longevity - Family history
Production
Udder/Hooves
Prettyness
Ease of calving
Temperament
Body Structure
Climate tolerance
Thriftyness

With that said, I'll say my old man and I differ vastly... he has his pets, I have mine... and here are some statistics... His, we've kept about 20 calves as replacements, we have 8 now, the average cull age is about 6 years, with the oldest being 10 years old at cull, the total calves from that line is 53, and we're up to the 6th generation. They've been plagued with bad hooves, prolapse and bad udders... With my favourite line, we've kept 6, we still have 4, and the average cull age is 10, the oldest being 15 and still going, and we've had 39 calves from that line, they have never lost a calf for any reason, nor has any been pulled, we're only on the 3rd generation from that line. So when I look back, we actually sold more calves from "my" line since we didn't need to replace as many.. Furthermore, they've all got near perfect udders and never need hoof trimming, never had a prolapse, and the temperaments are better.. the only weakness I've seen is that 2 of them chronically retain placenta.. but, since they're docile, I can give them some hay, and I can then proceed with giving them oxytocin and uterine boluses without them moving... "my" line has had about a 20-40 lb weaning weight disadvantage, though that is diminishing over time.
I'm thinking that productivity is actually one of the easiest traits to breed into your herd.. it's all the others that are hard to breed in.. Longevity problems, prolapse prone, bad udders/hooves, temperament are nearly impossible traits to get rid of. I've also noticed that a great cow can give you nothing but problem calves, and that a poor cow might give you a calf that is outstanding, but never expect her to do it twice... you got lucky and you're better off keeping the offspring of that great calf

wow, my fingers are tired!

Here is a not too great looking cow who is thrifty, docile, has no health issues, is a great mother, and I think this is a steer calf any cow can be proud of