sheath design

Help Support CattleToday:

brihop

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
300
Reaction score
1
Location
Florida
Can someone educate me on correct sheath design? I assume one that reduces the chances of the bull stepping on his dick with his backlegs when hes on the prowl is better. Can anyone offer any explanation/details?

For example: A real different sheath design can be seen between the santa gertrudis bulls "partner" and "polled chief" with Bovine Elite.

http://www.bovine-elite.com/santa.asp
 
There's a noticeable difference?
Not that I can really make out from those photos. Maybe if I could see 'em in the flesh.
Tighter is better, in my book, and I've seen breeders make some pretty significant strides in that area since the 1980s.

About 1/3 of polled bulls (whether they're Brahman-influenced or not) have an absence or underdevelopment of the retractor prepuce muscles - which can allow for more of the prepuce to 'hang out' of the sheath and potentially be damaged by hooves, thorns, barbed wire, etc.
 
First expensive (5k) bull I bought was a brangus bull in Sulphur Springs, TX. Didn't have him a month and went out one day to see his pecker hanging out shaped like a 'U.' Either him or a herd mate had stepped on it and cut it in about half. Think I got $1100 for him at the salebarn. I don't use any Brahma influenced bulls anymore (not for that reason) but still when I'm bull shopping, the sheath is one of first things I notice.
 
Right, a bull can have a lazy prepuce regardless of sheath conformation. I also understand that tighter/cleaner is typically better. However, I wondered if there is anything more to it than that, especially since many BR influenced breeds aren't going to have a very tight sheath. Is there anything specific to look for regardless of breed & BR influence?
 
Apart from having a tighter sheath, you also want a forward angle and not straight down, the more acute the forward angle, the better. The lazy prepuce is more a problem for grass seeds and burrs getting into the sheath causing a nasty infection than its a worry for bulls stepping on the penis.
 
As far as tightness of sheath, Wavemaker is as good as it gets for a Santa and Strain is carrying too much sheath.
As far as forward angle goes, Hef-A-Nizer is pretty good and Yogi not so good.
 
Thanks Knersie, you confirmed what I've always just assumed to be good. I've seen some pretty much straight downward angles out there!
 
Stepbystep":3tn75ory said:
Can some one psy a pic or 2 of a bull with good sheath design? I am more visual

Thanks


Good sheath
TNT2.jpg



Poor sheath
8f_3s3p_south-africa_550.jpg
 
Think a lot of traits go hand in hand like that. The top bull has much straighter lines and just cleaner made all over, while at the same time that type of bull will tend to have shorter harder muscles. The bottom bull while sloppier made, carries substantially more retail product. He's got a massive hip just look how his lower 3rd of his rump extends nearly down to his hock.
 
Just for the sake of not giving half truths, you have see look at sheaths in a breed context. What would be considered a poor sheath in a hereford or angus would probably still be a very good sheath in brahman influenced cattle. I'm not saying the breeds with good sheaths should let it slip, but there are more important traits to improve than getting a fetish over sheaths in most all British and Continental breeds. As long as it's functional, won't shorten the productive career of the bull and not emphasize an existing problem in a herd, I say keep working on the other traits that needs improving while just keeping an eye on sheaths.

As is the case in all traits, overemphasis on sheaths can lead to breeding tight hided cattle that will tend to be harder doing and of the dry muscle, dry bone type, so always keep the balance when making breeding decisions otherwise you'll end up losing more on the other end than what you're gaining on the end you're working on.

To stare yourself blind at a sheath that may not be ideal, but still very acceptable in any breed and miss the bigger picture of an outstanding beef bull, tells a story, too.
 
-XBAR-":2xu831kk said:
Think a lot of traits go hand in hand like that. The top bull has much straighter lines and just cleaner made all over, while at the same time that type of bull will tend to have shorter harder muscles. The bottom bull while sloppier made, carries substantially more retail product. He's got a massive hip just look how his lower 3rd of his rump extends nearly down to his hock.

what absolute garbage, the main difference between the two hereford bulls pictured is fat, the top bull is lean, muscular, in real breeding shape, the bottom bull is fat, sloppy and as a result looks weak in the top and lazy. What appears to be lower deeper quarter is fat, the inability to determine the difference between fat and muscle is one of the biggest hindrances to selecting seedstock that will actually improve the traits you want to improve that faces us, if you watched these two bulls walk I guarantee the upper bull would demonstrate flex of his hind quarters whereas the lower bull would wobble as he walked, muscle doesn't wobble it flexes, fat doesn't flex it wobbles.
 
As with most traits this is one score out of many. As I'm sure we're all aware, all animals have week and strong points but I think sheath design (unless grossly exaggerated) is one of the secondary bull selection traits.

As far as one trait correlating to another….I think that is a misnomer. That is like saying all black cattle grade better than other colors. One set of bull photos do not represent a bovine trait across the board. That is not a judgment of the bulls in the photos; I'm just saying it is a small sample size.
 

Latest posts

Top