THM Durango 4037

[DOC HARRIS]

George-

"I bet the elk are bugling in Rocky Mountain National Park!"

You can just bet your "Antlers" on it George!

DOC HARRIS

 

[Herefords.US]

Now looking at many hereford advertisements I'm still not sold on the udder quality in many herefords and I was wondering if any of you would comment on what I see as mediocre udders on so many of the cows in the catalog. There seems to be an awful lot of slope to the udders and eneven teat size.

I'll agree with you, compared to say 10/15 years ago though, they are on average a lot better. I think some real improvements were made a few years back, then breeders started focusing on carcass traits, and have let the udder slip back a little in their selection order. Definitely something that breeders still need to pay a lot of attention to. Including me.

I don't see any udders that not functional? Yes there is always room for improvement, but trying to perfect an already functional udder while letting other things slip as what is happening in the angus breed is counterproductive in my opinion. I'll much rather have unequal, yet still functional udders than a whole breed with chicken legs.

Not meaning to start a fight, but big teats and sloppy udders seem to be a bigger problem in the true herefords than in the mutants from the dark side.

Every time I see this argument, I'm reminded that the prettiest cow I've owned - with the most PERFECT udder - always raised one of the lightest and crappiest calves in my herd. In the case of udders, I'll take function over form. I hope I get to the point where I can select on whether an udder has too much slope or not. Because that will mean that I've got all the other traits darn near perfect!

George

 

[alexfarms]

Back to Durango... anyone knows who sells his semen except for Reeds?

If I had a choice between using the Durango bull and the red necked bull you posted on here about a week ago, I rather use your red necked bull.

 

[KNERSIE]

Back to Durango... anyone knows who sells his semen except for Reeds?

If I had a choice between using the Durango bull and the red necked bull you posted on here about a week ago, I rather use your red necked bull.

Me too, but that still doesn't solve my problem to try and find something unique to most of SA, marketable, of the type I breed without compromising on what I believe a hereford should be.

The problem I am facing is my entire herd is very quickly becoming a single line, that is fine for the few seedstock bulls I sell, but not quite what my repeat commercial customers need.

 

[Herefords.US]

Regarding the Ward's Sale catalog, I was really impressed with this cow:

Lot #35 Selling Half Interest-

She's probably too big though!

George

 

[rocket2222]

KNERSIE - and others-

I don't see any udders that not functional? Yes there is always room for improvement, but trying to perfect an already functional udder while letting other things slip as what is happening in the angus breed is counterproductive in my opinion. I'll much rather have unequal, yet still functional udders than a whole breed with chicken legs.
Not meaning to start a fight, but big teats and sloppy udders seem to be a bigger problem in the true herefords than in the mutants from the dark side.

:clap: :clap: KNERSIE-- You are absolutely correct with these "above quote" statements. This is what I was referring to in the 5th post of "this" thread. Focusing on ONE TRAIT to the detriment of others is foolish management! "Funnel Butts" is just ONE of the negative characteristics which has blighted the Angus Breed as a result of "Single Trait Selection and UNselection" choices.

DOC HARRIS

First off, as seedstock producers shouldn't we aim for perfect (in everything) instead of just functional. If your not trying to improve in everything that needs improving, why be a seedstock producer. Why do something's need special attention, why, because I'd bet it was one of the first things Jake looked at, and if there was someway to tell how many ancestors of those cows had prolapsed, that would have been the second thing he looked for. It's not today's Herefords that hurt us, history does. Cleaning up udders is NOT single trait selection, it's basic good seedstock producer selection, if we really what breeders like Jake to say, "hey they really have cleaned up their act, I'll try a Hereford bull on my black cows", as you can see, just having "functional" udders, not going to do it.

 

[Jake]

First off, as seedstock producers shouldn't we aim for perfect (in everything) instead of just functional. If your not trying to improve in everything that needs improving, why be a seedstock producer. Why do something's need special attention, why, because I'd bet it was one of the first things Jake looked at, and if there was someway to tell how many ancestors of those cows had prolapsed, that would have been the second thing he looked for. It's not today's Herefords that hurt us, history does. Cleaning up udders is NOT single trait selection, it's basic good seedstock producer selection, if we really what breeders like Jake to say, "hey they really have cleaned up their act, I'll try a Hereford bull on my black cows", as you can see, just having "functional" udders, not going to do it.

100% correct. "Functional" is another word just like "moderate" or "maternal" everybody is going to have a different opinion. Most "functional" udders come from there being genes in the background that are BAD udders. If you happen to match the two up down the line somewhere and end up with 20 heifers that have poor udders you can't afford to cull them all in one sweep.

No a breeder doesn't need to be super restrictive against udder flaws but there are too many poor uddered cows that are donors in the hereford breed along with other breeds. The commercial man loses man hours and has increased headaches by seedstock guys who decide what traits can be hidden or passed as "functional".

 

[alexfarms]

First off, as seedstock producers shouldn't we aim for perfect (in everything) instead of just functional. If your not trying to improve in everything that needs improving, why be a seedstock producer. Why do something's need special attention, why, because I'd bet it was one of the first things Jake looked at, and if there was someway to tell how many ancestors of those cows had prolapsed, that would have been the second thing he looked for. It's not today's Herefords that hurt us, history does. Cleaning up udders is NOT single trait selection, it's basic good seedstock producer selection, if we really what breeders like Jake to say, "hey they really have cleaned up their act, I'll try a Hereford bull on my black cows", as you can see, just having "functional" udders, not going to do it.

100% correct. "Functional" is another word just like "moderate" or "maternal" everybody is going to have a different opinion. Most "functional" udders come from there being genes in the background that are BAD udders. If you happen to match the two up down the line somewhere and end up with 20 heifers that have poor udders you can't afford to cull them all in one sweep.

No a breeder doesn't need to be super restrictive against udder flaws but there are too many poor uddered cows that are donors in the hereford breed along with other breeds. The commercial man loses man hours and has increased headaches by seedstock guys who decide what traits can be hidden or passed as "functional".

If Herefords are gonna be the top maternal breed, they are going to have to have consistantly functional udders throughout their lives, even as aged cows. The breed as a whole has alot that can be improved on udders. BUT, first define the perfect udder. When I lived in northast Nebraska, some Angus breeders who calved in the late winter had trouble with heifers having too small of teats. They flat out froze them off!! I'm not sure you can gget any better than functional throughout their lives.

 

[KNERSIE]

First off, as seedstock producers shouldn't we aim for perfect (in everything) instead of just functional. If your not trying to improve in everything that needs improving, why be a seedstock producer. Why do something's need special attention, why, because I'd bet it was one of the first things Jake looked at, and if there was someway to tell how many ancestors of those cows had prolapsed, that would have been the second thing he looked for. It's not today's Herefords that hurt us, history does. Cleaning up udders is NOT single trait selection, it's basic good seedstock producer selection, if we really what breeders like Jake to say, "hey they really have cleaned up their act, I'll try a Hereford bull on my black cows", as you can see, just having "functional" udders, not going to do it.

Go back to the said catalogue and look again, show me the problem udders there and educate me. I stand by what I am saying that I'll rather have a sound imperfect udder that lasts the cow's productive lifetime without my help than a breed full of perfect udders with flawed rear leg structure like you see in modern day angus.

 

[Jake]

There are only a few in the catalog that I see real problems with Lot 58 being one of them,75 another a 5 year old, 82, 85 a 3 year old, 89. There are some more undesirable YES they are probably funtional today but I personally would not use a bull out of them as I don't see those as long lasting udders or mammory genetics that I want hidden in the DNA of my herd.

As a commercial man I refuse to use maternal genetics that lack good strong udders. It is a highly heritbale trait that is easily progressed without losing anything else. The problems you allude to in the angus have little to do with udder selection; the "funnel butts" as DOC calls them are from the chase for numbers and carcass traits.

I really appreciate what the Ward herd has to offer. There are some very nice animals in there and I can appreciate the form the Durango brings to the equation. My udder complex doesn't start with him in the hereford breed, it is a breed wide problem that has kept us from using hereford bulls for 20 years.

Why use subpar or average uddered individuals of the hereford breed when I as a commercial man can find well uddered genetics that offer all the same positive attributes elsewhere in another breed?

 

[rocket2222]

Go back to the said catalogue and look again, show me the problem udders there and educate me. I stand by what I am saying that I'll rather have a sound imperfect udder that lasts the cow's productive lifetime without my help than a breed full of perfect udders with flawed rear leg structure like you see in modern day angus.

Ok, I'll play along with it, I know you know darn well what a good udder looks like. ;-) :lol: Last year in a effort to make breeders more aware and pay more attention too what to look for in a sound, good quality udder the AHA came out with a new scoring system. I think most people would agree it's a much tougher system to score, and if used correctly a much tougher system to get a good score on. It is of coarse still left up to the breeder on how to interpret the new standards they've set. Glancing back through the catalog it's much easier to pick out the ones that I think would score well, they would be (from memory) lots 4, 5, 7, 29 and 78, the dam of lot 52 has the best udder, she would lose a point for teat size though, the rest go down hill from there.
I just don't think here in the US we can afford to let this go, way to many bad memories from the past.

 

[Northern Rancher]

Interesting analogy-Angus have bad back legs so I can take a pass on Hereford udder quality. When a breed such as Hereford's is famous for their udders and not in a good way you have to be relentless in your selection. I've seen Knersie be very critical about eye set-poor udders have caused me a lot more grief than than that particular trait. In regards to embryo transplant both sides of the equation had better be close to flawless as far as feet, legs, udders and scrotal otherwise your just spending alot of money to propogate common. When I purchase genetics I expect to improve or at the very least maintain soundness. In a commercial situation gooid enough might be good enough when selling bulls I don't think it is.