Update (Warning! Pics)

[Frankie]

Here was our Foresight bull calf in April:

Here he is last week when we weaned him:

BW 79lbs
Actual WW 840
Adj WW 824

I'm still not too sure about his sheath. But he grew pretty well on grass and momma's milk. I'm glad we bred her back the same way for next year's calf.

And the Midland heifer that I posted earlier:

at weaning:

BW 67 lbs
Actual WW 585
Adj WW 672

She was only 184 days old at weaning and also gets a bump because her momma is a three year old.

 

[Herefords.US]

Good looking calves, Frankie.

George

 

[bigbull338]

those are some goodlooking calves.

 

[tom4018]

How many days was the bull calf at weaning?

Nice calves.

 

[CPL]

The bull looks very nice. Hard to tell how nice because there's really not a good picture ( and I know its hard messing with the calves that only have mom on their mind) but he looks very thick and meaty.

The heifer strikes me as average though. Her weaning weight is acceptable for me, but it looks like she gets really pinched in her fore flank, in both pictures her top looks questionable (could be the way she's standing) and she looks finer boned. Nonetheless two nice calves that definitely have their place.

 

[Frankie]

How many days was the bull calf at weaning?

Nice calves.

Thanks. He was 211 days old when we weaned him. WDA was 3.98. We'll see how he does on test.

 

[tom4018]

I see you went back and edited your post to say that the heifer was weaned at 184 days.

Where do you see the post has been edited?
2.8 ADG does not seem bad at all to me. Wish all of mine would average that.

 

[Frankie]

I see you went back and edited your post to say that the heifer was weaned at 184 days.

I didn't edit anything. The data was there from the start; you just missed it.

 

[iowafarmer]

well i like the bulls top line and how blocky he is. I dont like his sheath tho and i dont know why but i really dont like the heifer her something just seems off about her.

 

[redfornow]

I see you went back and edited your post to say that the heifer was weaned at 184 days.

I didn't edit anything. The data was there from the start; you just missed it.

Not the first thing he "missed"

 

[greenwillowhereford II]

Very impressive growth on both animals. I like the bull better than the heifer. I'd agree that the sheath is about the only question mark about him.

 

[Flacowboy]

I personally would like to see a stronger top and more depth to the heifer. I agree that the bull is blocky and looks to be a meat wagon in the making. His sheath could definitely be cleaner. Nice cattle though!

 

[angus9259]

I think the heifer might be better than the pictures indicate - seeming to face downhill in both pics throws off her topline and rear end. I also believe those are quite commendable birth to weaning spreads.

 

[Avalon]

I really like the Foresight bull, lots of mass and seems well balanced. Yes he has to much sheath for a typical angus. But he has a lot of power. He's going to be a great bull for someone. The Midland heifer??? well she's why I still have 4 straws of the 5 that I bought a few years back. Then again shes still better than a lot of the calves I had this year. Just a crtique not a critisizm

 

[Frankie]

I like her, maybe because she's so personable, but I like her momma, her grandmomma and her great-grandmomma. We've got a 5/8 (or so) sister that I like, too, but this gal is more personable. In fact, my biggest concern about her is disposition. We'll see how she works out. I think we like the Midland heifers better than Midland bulls. But we did wean one Midland bull over 800 lbs in this group. He adjusted back to a 205 day weight of 794. His dam is bred back to Midland; otherwise, we're taking a wait and see attitude. I know we'll use Midland more, but think we need to be careful about which cows we use him on.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

I like her, maybe because she's so personable, but I like her momma, her grandmomma and her great-grandmomma. We've got a 5/8 (or so) sister that I like, too, but this gal is more personable. In fact, my biggest concern about her is disposition. We'll see how she works out. I think we like the Midland heifers better than Midland bulls. But we did wean one Midland bull over 800 lbs in this group. He adjusted back to a 205 day weight of 794. His dam is bred back to Midland; otherwise, we're taking a wait and see attitude. I know we'll use Midland more, but think we need to be careful about which cows we use him on.

Frankie-

I have noticed on most of the threads the last week or so that the general 'thought trend' is leaning toward the discussion of EPD's, particularly "Milk" and "SC". Given that the subject of EPD's is, arguably and admittedly, a perplexing and Herculean task - at BEST, I commend Frankie on this post inasmuch as she points out that they are taking a "wait and see attitude" on the uses of certain EPD's relating to Weaning Weight, Disposition, Docility, and ( subtly expressed in this post) how they plan to utilize EPD's WITH the EPD's of the COWS to which their bull subject will be bred!

In recent discussions on these posts, I have noticed that the dangerous trend of SINGLE TRAIT SELECTION is again lunging into the discussions with some poster's. I would suggest that the antagonistic characteristics ( low BW vs. High YW, low BW, High Milk vs. CW [Carcass Weight], and various SC EPD's as they relate to the bull's daughters' Fertility potentialities), be understood before arbitrarily being condemned and denounced 'out-of-hand' by those who don't comprehend the functionality of the EPD 'Evaluation of Performance' methods in the first place! The Accuracy (ACC) figures which relate to the reliability of ALL EPD's seem to be taken as an "afterthought" in the mind's of some breeders.

"SINGLE -TRAIT-SELECTION-thinking" is a formula for failure - not only in breeding, but in understanding what the management of EPD's resulting in successful breeding experiences is all about in the first place! Ignoring the "Accuracy" figures is like "buying a pig in a poke". Having to "wait and see" can be minimized by watching the Accuracy figures and 'betting' on proven genetics. Good work, Frankie!

DOC HARRIS