To Darkhorse (immediately above) ... cows with no pedigrees can be some awesome (!!) critters. Pedigrees do not determine the quality of the stock.
True Grit Farms":2ufo7dj2 said:
talltimber":2ufo7dj2 said:
Thanks for the time involved in that WC.
What would you suggest the assoc's do from here, moving forward?
I think some of the smaller outfits are trying to big dog. They have a few nice calves and get to thinking money for a bull sounds a lot better than selling a good steer off the farm. I wonder what the actual keeper/cull percentage is of the big outfits are for bull calves? Heifer calves sold as replacements or kept, vs sold as feeders?
This is why right here. The older larger pure bred breeders were more honest and knew how to use a knife. IMO
Most of the bigger outfits I've talked to claim to cull 50%+ of the animals. I was surprised how many of the big breeders use timed AI first and then turn the same bull in with the cows after one AI service.
I would like to see the breed associations do what Dun mentions the Red Angus folks do, or what the Aubrac association does ... or something similar to either one ... where the % blood is what is required, and where a 7/8ths animal only counts as a 7/8ths animal in an up-grading program.
I have zero problem with any breed that wants to allow an up-grading program, but way (!!) too many do something like what I laid out above ... and too many producers haven't really thought it all the way through as to how much heterosis they're actually selling to the commercial cattle operator.
...which get's to Blind Raven's comments...
Yes, the barn door is open and (to some extent) the horses are already out.
But, it's not too late.
So, as to my recommendation to try to corral the horses that are out and re-establish some sort of quality pen for the horses to stay in, I would suggest a planned migration away from what the breeds currently do (allow a 7/8ths animal to qualify as a 100%'er for up-grading) to one that only allows animals above ____% of actual pedigree blood to be considered a purebred ... and ... for each animal to only be used at their actual % blood (per the paper).
I'm fine if Breed 1 wants to set that level at 75% and another at 80% and another at 95% ... doesn't matter to me where any breed draws their line (RA is, apparently, 87% ... and Aubracs are at 90%, also with disqualifying characteristics) ... just that the line is drawn and it is clear. The marketplace likes clarity and certainty. Easy to understand ideas are paramount to good marketing.
So, if 'ripping the band aid off' is too harsh for some breed associations, maybe a decade long migration back to purity that would look something like this ...
2018 calves with a true breed purity of 80% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2019 calves with a true breed purity of 81% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2020 calves with a true breed purity of 82% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2021 calves with a true breed purity of 83% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2022 calves with a true breed purity of 84% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2023 calves with a true breed purity of 85% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2024 calves with a true breed purity of 86% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2025 calves with a true breed purity of 87% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2026 calves with a true breed purity of 88% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2027 calves with a true breed purity of 89% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
2028 calves with a true breed purity of 90% or higher are registered as purebred and 100% animals are fullblood
... something like this would allow current breeders to not be left too far in a lurch (i.e., with too many head they thought were 'purebred' but were, in actuality, really low percentage of their breed of choice), and it would allow all breeders time to migrate their herd back into pursing the things that make their breed the awesome thing they think it is (whatever that might be, as it varies from breed to breed).
If an association wants to do this transition faster or in a different way, sweet. Draw a line, figure out a way to get everyone who wants to be on one side of the line a reasonable way to get there without it ruining anyone's business, and then tell the world about it so all of the bull / cow / heifer buyers can make plans.
Oh, and yes Bright Raven, all breeds have something else in the woodpile. This is nature, after all. However, anyone representing themselves as a purebred (or fullblood) breeder of any breed of any type of animal (or plant) owes it to the others who are trying to do the same sort of thing, to tell the truth to the best of their ability.
So, if Bull A bred Cow Z to make Calf 123, I shouldn't lie (even if it's to my short-term advantage to do so) to tell the world that Bull B actually bred Cow Z to make Calf 123. While that may have happened in the past (and fouled up the integrity of the old pedigrees), there is no reason to allow past failings to contaminate what is being attempted in the here and now. IMO.