I know this is off the subject but I thought this would be a good time to ask while you Hereford guys are all gathered together.What was the thinking behind selecting Herefords that were light colored and had as much white down their back as possible.Had a guy tell me he selected that way and I didn't think fast enough to ask him why.Thanks
Using bulls of the past
- Thread starter Alan
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
I don't know if this is true or not; but my Grandfather said the justification was that the "High Yeller" Herefords supposedly milked better. As for the excessive white, I think some people just like them that way. Really colorful Longhorns often bring more money than less well marked Longhorns. Hereford selection was much the same in those days. There were no EPDs and few folks collected performance data so people bought what they liked.
R.N.Reed":10y7otwj said:
"mellow yellow" was a buzzword in the pony era.
As far as the white on the backs, it was never the norm, the oldtimers discriminated as much against too much white (line backs) as they did against the lack thereof (rednecks).
It probably started in the showring, but silly as it may sound it did serve a purpose to protect breed character, something that has been lost to a great degree eversince. We can only speculate why :roll:
The milking ability comment was probably based on a single line that milked well that happened to be more yellow than cherry red, but to say "high yellers" milked better in general is little more than an old wife's tale. There was a time when the typical hereford cow was short, squat, fat and fertile and lacked milking ability. The problem with going too far with milk is that the fertility part suffers and then its completely counter productive.
LFF
Well-known member
KNERSIE":3g48bfh3 said:
From what I've seen lately most people now seem to perfer rednecks with very little white. That is one of the reasons some folks stay away from the Felton genetics of 774.
LFF":2kkzix7x said:
That seems to be the latest trend, my guess is so that the calves out of these bulls will look more like crossbreds or even baldies to command greater market acceptance in the world of black cattle today. Personally I don't discriminate against either or select for either, bur prefer my herefords to look like herefords and not like red baldies
greenwillowhereford II
Well-known member
KNERSIE":2gbv1shp said:
Well said! :clap:
One thing I've noticed about 774 is that the calves out of R4ed Angus cows are mostly brockle faced, not typical baldys. The part that I find interesting is that his F1 daughters being brockle faced throw brockle faced calves marked just like themselves when bred back to a Re Angus. His calves also quality grade well.
In regards to F243, I think the majority of his daughters made excellent cows. I have never herd negative things about the udders, but I am sure there are exceptions. When he was popular the udders were a problem with udders in the breed anyway, so I'm sure the other 50% of the genetics probably had influence that was in turn blamed on him. I like to see him a generation back in pedigrees (grandparent).
He put 1854 daughters in production who had an average of 101.5% in the weaning groups, and of the Trait leader sons he produced almost every one of them had daughters who were over 100% in their respective weaning groups. His carcass values are not his best trait, and I would think the growth of his calves would be on the lower end compared to nowadays. His use has fallen off in the last few years with only 3 calves for 07, 6 for 06, 15 for 05 and 33 for 04. He shows 17 DOD's and 119 Donors which is a testament to his daughters. He also shows 126 sons with calves registered, eight of them are trait leaders.
A good son from him could make some improvements in a herd on a few traits depending on the dam, and I think any daughters would be a plus.
He put 1854 daughters in production who had an average of 101.5% in the weaning groups, and of the Trait leader sons he produced almost every one of them had daughters who were over 100% in their respective weaning groups. His carcass values are not his best trait, and I would think the growth of his calves would be on the lower end compared to nowadays. His use has fallen off in the last few years with only 3 calves for 07, 6 for 06, 15 for 05 and 33 for 04. He shows 17 DOD's and 119 Donors which is a testament to his daughters. He also shows 126 sons with calves registered, eight of them are trait leaders.
A good son from him could make some improvements in a herd on a few traits depending on the dam, and I think any daughters would be a plus.
rocket2222
Well-known member
I knew of 2 breeders back in the late 80's early 90's that had sons of F243, both sons were cow killers come calving time. Could have been the dams side of the sons that was the problem for sure, both bulls were purchased at the same sale. I believe the sale was in N.C. I remember asking one of the breeders if he was turning the birth weights and calving problems to the AHA, he said no, he would not, he did not want to hurt his friend [the breeder] or the sire's good reputation on what was probably a fluke thing. I often wonder when looking at older bulls, how much of this went on. A lot of breeders back then also only turned in numbers on their top performing calves thinking this would help their epds.
rocket2222
Well-known member
KNERSIE":3of3cx24 said:
Gees, Somebody else who probably thinks I own a bunch of crossbreds
I do have both, light and dark, but prefer the dark because they are easier to sell, and I need all the help I can get. I look at it in about the same light as horned/polled, I could hardly give away a horned hereford round here, even though I like some horned genetics and have some in the herd, I try to stay away from getting horned calves, thats hard for me to sell.rocket2222":22i98kyw said:KNERSIE":22i98kyw said:
Gees, Somebody else who probably thinks I own a bunch of crossbreds
I wasn't referring to you or anyone in specific, I replied to LFF's comment.
I, too have both dark and more yellow, I don't have linebacks, but I do have rednecks, like I said I don't descriminate against either, but prefer a more traditional look.
When the breed character became less important it just happened to coincide with a few other changes to the breed ;-)
I just culled and sold my best 07 bullcalf to a feedlot because I have no market for horned bulls.
The same way some believe the yellows milk better, its my opinion that the yellows have better hair quality for my environment. THe darker cherry reds do sell better to commercial breeders over here.
rocket2222
Well-known member
KNERSIE":23k6rf03 said:rocket2222":23k6rf03 said:KNERSIE":23k6rf03 said:
Gees, Somebody else who probably thinks I own a bunch of crossbreds
I wasn't referring to you or anyone in specific, I replied to LFF's comment.
I, too have both dark and more yellow, I don't have linebacks, but I do have rednecks, like I said I don't descriminate against either, but prefer a more traditional look.
When the breed character became less important it just happened to coincide with a few other changes to the breed ;-)
I just culled and sold my best 07 bullcalf to a feedlot because I have no market for horned bulls.
The same way some believe the yellows milk better, its my opinion that the yellows have better hair quality for my environment. THe darker cherry reds do sell better to commercial breeders over here.
Hi knersie, yes, I knew that you were not reffering to me, I was just being a smartass
I think the darker color fad started in the colder more snow covered climates of northern U.S and Canada, when they found they had less skin problems [sun burn I guess] with the darker pigment and less white, from the sun reflecting of the snow.
