Too gutty?

[Santas and Duhram Reds]

Here is a bull that is not of my breeding but I have been flirting with the idea of using him a little on some of my heifers out of our herd bull. Is he too gutty? What is your overall impression of him

 

[Santas and Duhram Reds]

I don't know why the pic is cropped.

 

[hillsdown]

I can't see the full image, just the front half. You will have to resize the photo .

 

[Santas and Duhram Reds]

Not sure i know how to do that

will try this

http://i1215.photobucket.com/albums/cc5 ... C02817.jpg

Basically he is out of a cow I bought that was already bred. He was a great looking calf and went gutty over the winter. He may slowly be coming out of it, don't know what to think. Has been on feed for about 1 1/2 months now.

Thought I would add that he is 13 months old.

 

[hillsdown]

Nothing wrong with being deep. ;-)

 

[FlyingLSimmentals]

Like hillsdown said there's nothing wrong with good depth. Matter of fact it's one of the toughest characteristics to get. Be sure to use that Bull. Depth means capacity meaning more room for weight to be had. That's what you sell in the end weight, weight and more weight the better. Also if your keeping heifers from that bull hopefully they will get that depth which will give them more room for their calves allowing them to calve easier. For the most part the bull looks good to me, I would like for him to have a little thicker neck and less dewlap.

 

[Jovid]

Can you ever have too much gut? I think he looks good.

 

[Santas and Duhram Reds]

Here is one of my own breeding. A lot of people seem to prefer him but I think it is because he has a bit more of an "atheletic" phenotype. I do think he has more muscle in the rear but you never know. One day I like my stuff and then the next I think they are worthless. They change in time too which also throws a monkey wrench in one's thinking.

 

[Kingfisher]

Here is one of my own breeding. A lot of people seem to prefer him but I think it is because he has a bit more of an "atheletic" phenotype. I do think he has more muscle in the rear but you never know. One day I like my stuff and then the next I think they are worthless. They change in time too which also throws a monkey wrench in one's thinking.

You will not know until you try him imho. He looks good! He ain't perfect but it looks like he might grow out of that! How else will you know if you don't turn him loose on at least a few heifers?

 

[FlyingLSimmentals]

The 2nd bull looks allright but not the caliber as the first. Again be sure to use the first one he's a herd builder. The 2nd one is allright for market and feeder calves but not one to keep breeding stock from unless your cows are dang good. Looks to athletic for me and I don't like his head shape compared to the other one anyway. Plus he's missing some depth.

 

[Bonsman]

Here is one of my own breeding. A lot of people seem to prefer him but I think it is because he has a bit more of an "atheletic" phenotype. I do think he has more muscle in the rear but you never know. One day I like my stuff and then the next I think they are worthless. They change in time too which also throws a monkey wrench in one's thinking.

I really like this slick-haired bull. How old is he? He should do very well in the heat.

 

[Santas and Duhram Reds]

Not quite 13 months old. The other one is 2 months older

 

[Jovid]

I like the first bull by far over the second bull if you are looking for a performance bull.

Now the show folks would probably prefer the second bull.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Like hillsdown said there's nothing wrong with good depth. Matter of fact it's one of the toughest characteristics to get. Be sure to use that Bull. Depth means capacity meaning more room for weight to be had. That's what you sell in the end weight, weight and more weight the better. Also if your keeping heifers from that bull hopefully they will get that depth which will give them more room for their calves allowing them to calve easier. For the most part the bull looks good to me, I would like for him to have a little thicker neck and less dewlap.

Short answers: How else will you know if you don't turn him loose on at least a few heifers? - by carefully analyzing the Multiple Trait EPD's, AND the MVP's (Molecular Value Predictions) of the bull(s) in question! THEN, and only then, can one be reasonably confident that the progeny of the bulls(s) will justify their use on ANY female - if THEIR EPd's and MVP's are BALANCED!

...weight, weight, weight and more weight. The more weight the better.

In "Single Trait Selection" thinking protocols, selling MORE weight means more dollars in the bank account. This is true - as far as it goes. BUT - that weight creates a separate set of considerations - namely; costly feed efficiency, expensive development costs to maturity (for retaining replacements) and additional feed and pasture space for large seedstock brood cows, and the overall feed costs (hay, pasture, minerals, supplementation during the cow's lifetime due to her mature adult size, and less total calves to sell at the end of the season(s) due to fewer matrons per alloted acreage). "Weight, weight, weight" costs Money, money, money every time it is tried! "Smaller cows are more profitable!"

A few of the other "trait" comments can be addressed by focusing on "MULTIPLE Trait Selection" factors in every aspect of profitable beef production protocols.

Giving consideration to ONE factor only in any business is usually not in the best interest of the producer or BU$INE$$ Manager insofar as PROFIT is concerned!

DOC HARRIS

 

[FlyingLSimmentals]

Doc Harris - your right weight weight and weight does cost you money money money but you gotta spend money if you want something good. You get what you pay for. Your also right on about cows size, a good smaller frame cow that milks good will make just as good and even better cow than the large frame one will and will cost you less money to take care of. I know I've got several of them, I've also been trying to tell my uncles that for years but they still prefer the bigger frame. The hard part is picking the right moderate heifers to save for cows to be those productive females because more moderate or small could mean problems. Such as calving, wearing down being nursed, etc... That's where the homework gets involved knowing your genetics.

My comment about weight, that's what we want I meant to be directed about their calves, which I felt the first bull with the depth would give his calves more weight by giving them more capacity and muscle. With luck his daughters wouldn't make to big of a cow depends on the dam and his genetics that I'm not fully aware of. The 2nd bull I thought will sire narrower calves with a taller lanky frame with not as much depth creating plainly a market calf and not very good replacement stock.

But neither bull looked bad, I just like one somewhat more and would pay more money for him because I would think he would give me heavier calfs and better stock.

 

[SRBeef]

I can't see the full image, just the front half. You will have to resize the photo .

If you hold down your "Ctrl" key and also press the (-) minus sign (to the right of the zero key) it will change the font and photo size so you can see the whole picture. Hitting Ctrl and the + key makes it larger again.

Jim

 

[DOC HARRIS]

FLS-

Your points here are well taken. It is obvious that you understnad the basic principles of Genetic Inheritance factors. I empathize with you, for from my past teaching experiences, regarding 'changing' already made-up minds and opinions, it is similar to banging you head against a wall! :bang: :bang: I question the concept, however, that larger frame cows automatically result in more profit!. The problem in attempting to clarify one's meaning in its direct state hits a wall of opposition because of the listeners reluctance to comprehend the message! So many times they wish to argue rather than to admit that there may be a better way than that to which they have been accustomed all of their lives. "Repetition" seems to be the best teacher! Hang in there with your family, and continue to stress the facts that "Smaller Cows are more PROFITABLE" and that "Multiple Trait Selection" protocols can prevent time-consuming breeding errors!

By consistently focusing on ONE characteristic or trait, regardless of what that trait is, will sooner or later overwhelm OTHER traits which are genetically critical in maintaining BALANCE with optimal breeding protocols. Here is just one example of what I mean: A Montana State University study found that the following traits were moderately to highly heritable: muscle, frame, body capacity, femininity, rear leg set, foot and pastern angle, udder depth and attachment, and teat size. These results indicate it is possible to change these traits through accurate selection and culling strategies. They also found that intense selection for femininity (and high MILK epd's) may result in cows that lack muscle and capacity. Long-term selection for low birth weight may decrease muscling and increase calving difficulty in replacement heifers due to reduced pelvic area.

Some of these antagonistic relationships are not strong, BUT intense and persistent selection over time for certain traits could certainly have a negative effect on other economically important traits, such as size (too large), and feed efficiency! Feed efficiency is highly heritable. By utilizing balanced EPD's and DNA technology, we can reduce the amount of feed required by steers in the feedlot, and by the cows producing those steers. Leading feed efficiency genetics will save $$$$ per head on yearling fed cattle, and up to $50 or more per cow per year! With feed costs as high as they are now, and NOT going to come down in the foreseeable future, THESE are justifiable reasons for understanding "Multiple Trait Selection" protocols, keeping an open mind, and refusing to be BARN BLIND regarding one's own management practices! :hide:

FLS - you mentioned that "...with luck his daughters wouldn't make too big of a cow...". We make our OWN luck, and by diligently attempting to follow the above management and breeding protocols - we can get LUCKIER AND LUCKIER!

DOC HARRIS

 

[ANAZAZI]

Both are good. Depth and capacity is a very good thing to have in cattle. The homegrown bull is still not shamed; as he has qualities of his own. A better top line for example.

 

[FlyingLSimmentals]

Exactly ANAZAZI, every animal has strong characteristics and weak charateristics. I learned a long time ago that there wasn't a perfect animal. I like the homegrown bull's length and his topline. I just feel that the other bull has more likeable characteristics than the homegrown. That's why I said I would pay more for the first bull than the homegrown bull if I was looking at the bulls to use. But both bulls are good enough that I wouldn't pass on using them if they were mine as long as I got a place for them and enough heifers or cows for them to share. I would just give the first bull more females than the homegrown bull. Who knows I might be surprised the best bull doesn't always have the best calves.
Also thanks Doc for the compliments.

 

[ANAZAZI]

Also, a very long bull Like a blonde dacuitaine may look pencil gutted, but still have room for lots of forage in there due to his length. :2cents: