Whats wrong with Simmental cattle?

[Travlr]

Breeds like angus didn't double in size from their 100 s of year's average overnight without some outside blood. And if you think it stopped there and then you are a fool.
Zero reason right now for every breed registery not to require parental dna verification of every animal registered. Technology is available at a reasonable cost.
Big difference between a pure bred animal and a registered animal.

I don't understand how and why the breed associations have become so lax. But even worse is how the public, the people involved in using animals and buying animals and paying MORE for registered animals.. are so comfortable with "registered" animals that are crossbreeds. The whole "designer dog" thing is just another name for MUTT and it's crazy how people have come to be not just willing but enthused about paying more for mutts than for purebreds. And it's that same for cattle. I don't give a flip about how many eighths or sixteenths an animal is... if it isn't pure it's a crossbreed. Making up some kind of bogus registration association is just one more scam people are swallowing.
The whole point to registration and the idea of pure lines within a specific breed is that you can count on results. White udders on black Angus cattle mean they are likely to be crossed with something else. Even when crossbreeding if you were using two purebred lines from different breeds you could reasonably count on reliable outcomes.
It's no wonder so many herds are crap. No one can count on the genetics they could once expect. And EPDs only further cloud the issue if they are assigned to crossbred bulls.
It's all loose thinking, and I suspect CAB started the ball rolling with their idiocy.

 

[simme]

What does "pure" mean in a breed? Do people really believe that any breeds are "pure"? Were they created "pure" or did they evolve to "pure"? Whatever people or animals we have were developed over a long time by mixing genetics. At some point, some group of people decided they had achieved a breed and "closed' the herdbooks/genetics. Does that make them "pure"?

Even if they are "pure", does that assure that you can "count on results"? For traits that are inherited from "pure" genetics (like color and polled), the answer is yes. But does that ensure that all the animals from that "pure" strain will always produce desirable offspring? I think maybe some people may be too devoted to the concept of a breed. If following that thought will maximize your success (however you measure it), then it is a valid approach. But, experience will show that crossbred animals will often perform better than "pure" animals. Why not take advantage of that increase in longevity in females, fertility in females, productivity, growth, etc if it exists. Even in bulls. Even in dogs. I will even say that I find it somewhat arrogant for the "pure" breed associations to say that all the genetics needed in beef cattle are already in their breed and no other genetics are needed. I know that outside genetics have improved the american simmental breed since the original imports. Simmental and simangus are popular now for a reason other than a love of purity and breed association. I also believe that simmental and other genetics have improved some of the "pure" breeds. Some of those "mutt" breeds make pretty good dogs and cattle. If we can get over our mental block about "purity".

 

[Ebenezer]

To just add a little @Ky hills .... I am very thankful for the APA Standard of Perfection that was written as the "breeds" of chickens have changed with the infusion of other breeds etc to improve this or that... breeding good birds to the standard is what us people showing chickens strive for... and yes, you see variations in different ones as different breeders interpret the standard... there are provisions to breed new colors and for them to be accepted into the standard... and many birds are not bred to the weight and shape and good judges will disqualify a bird for failure to meet those basic standards.
Some of the breeds were hard to breed.... Araucana comes to mind... with the lethal gene of tufted and rumpless... and the Americana was "born" and accepted so that people could have the qualities they wanted...
BUT, they were given a new name and a new set of standards to be met.... not slid in under the radar in the guise of being a breed they were not....

Commercial chickens are as different yet similar as purebred cattle are to commercial crosses... many black cattle are "angus".... mostly..... and called such, but are composites of some others thrown in there... we have MOSTLY angus and crosses and do not hesitate to say so... but we do not show and it does not matter because we do not claim for them to be something they are not...

Are we better off or not??? Some of both I think.... although I do like my "lowline" angus crosses for their build is more like the short blocky angus types of "old"....and they are easy keepers on top of it.... as much as I am not one for alot of change, everything in life changes some....

I am not sure that purity is required by APA since breeds are identified by type rather than breeding.

 

[Travlr]

What does "pure" mean in a breed? Do people really believe that any breeds are "pure"? Were they created "pure" or did they evolve to "pure"? Whatever people or animals we have were developed over a long time by mixing genetics. At some point, some group of people decided they had achieved a breed and "closed' the herdbooks/genetics. Does that make them "pure"?

Even if they are "pure", does that assure that you can "count on results"? For traits that are inherited from "pure" genetics (like color and polled), the answer is yes. But does that ensure that all the animals from that "pure" strain will always produce desirable offspring? I think maybe some people may be too devoted to the concept of a breed. If following that thought will maximize your success (however you measure it), then it is a valid approach. But, experience will show that crossbred animals will often perform better than "pure" animals. Why not take advantage of that increase in longevity in females, fertility in females, productivity, growth, etc if it exists. Even in bulls. Even in dogs. I will even say that I find it somewhat arrogant for the "pure" breed associations to say that all the genetics needed in beef cattle are already in their breed and no other genetics are needed. I know that outside genetics have improved the american simmental breed since the original imports. Simmental and simangus are popular now for a reason other than a love of purity and breed association. I also believe that simmental and other genetics have improved some of the "pure" breeds. Some of those "mutt" breeds make pretty good dogs and cattle. If we can get over our mental block about "purity".

Well then why have registrations at all? Then we wouldn't be paying for what registrations are for, at least.

 

[farmerjan]

@Ebenezer , I agree what you are saying... that the breeds have to measure up to the type and the color patterns in the APA Standard... and many of the colors in some breeds were introduced by crossing out to other breeds to get the color pattern established... and then they had to be bred from there to get back to the TYPE of the bird.... that is where the cattle situation got MURKY.... the type , size , weight, confirmation of the breed got changed and then they got called the breed....
But at least in the chickens, there are types and sizes and weights that are supposed to be met.... get there any way you want.... and then colors.... and many times it took several different breeds to "make a new breed" ... but they didn't call it by the name of an old established breed... like the example of the Araucanas and the newly made and established Americanas.... and they have to be bred by a certain number of breeders and shown and have to become an established producer of off spring that breed true to type....and then will be considered into the APA Standard of perfection.
Yes, there is cross breeding done in chickens... especially to "make a new color pattern" in certain breeds... LIKE Plymouth Rocks..... all the colors that are now available...
But the purpose in my comparison is they have to meet certain standards to be called whatever breed they are called...and here is where things like "reputation" that @Jeanne - Simme Valley talks about.... a breeder of chickens will not last long if they sell breeding stock and it does not breed true to what they have sold it as.... so as she said, reputation is VERY IMPORTANT as to what you are selling will do what you say and is what you say it is....
It seems to me that there are not very many "standards" as far as what most cattle are to be called true to type... it all goes to the registration papers and that in and of its self can be very misleading if you want to really slide around the 100 % truth of it..... we all have seen it...

Do breeds like Brangus always breed true once the cross is established? The black in many breeds has come from cross breeding with something black.... but what establishes the type of the angus or the type of the herefords, or the type of the simmentals???? Are there breed standards that they should meet? And if so, were the changes that came about... Bigger taller angus back in the 80-90's.... voted on and agreed and the "standards set " then changed to reflect that????
Many of our beef breeds were established to fit a niche where they were bred... and colors were established that also fit the niche there.... herefords were red and white... PERIOD.... so the breeds were not just a certain type or size but were also a certain color when they were established... Like different breeds of poultry, that people bred to create different color patterns with the same type and other basics.... like leg color, egg color, type and stance..... "black herefords" have been created with the color pattern being dominant... but do they meet the criteria for what a "hereford" build and shape is supposed to look like????

It seems to me that creating a breed called sim-angus should mean that the offspring will have a melding of the two breeds to the point that they will have certain defining characteristics of the 2 breeds together and their off spring will breed true to type... not some more "simmi" and some more "angus"..... when bred to each other...
and yes, then the bulls will contribute 50% to whatever cow they are bred to with her the other 50%....so you are again back to a crossbred animal....
That is why we have "backyard chickens" and purebreds... you get a hodge-podge from the backyard birds and the purebreds should all look pretty much as cookie cutter copies of the parents ..... and the ones that are not very good for type and such should be chicken and dumplins.

 

[Travlr]

@Ebenezer , I agree what you are saying... that the breeds have to measure up to the type and the color patterns in the APA Standard... and many of the colors in some breeds were introduced by crossing out to other breeds to get the color pattern established... and then they had to be bred from there to get back to the TYPE of the bird.... that is where the cattle situation got MURKY.... the type , size , weight, confirmation of the breed got changed and then they got called the breed....
But at least in the chickens, there are types and sizes and weights that are supposed to be met.... get there any way you want.... and then colors.... and many times it took several different breeds to "make a new breed" ... but they didn't call it by the name of an old established breed... like the example of the Araucanas and the newly made and established Americanas.... and they have to be bred by a certain number of breeders and shown and have to become an established producer of off spring that breed true to type....and then will be considered into the APA Standard of perfection.
Yes, there is cross breeding done in chickens... especially to "make a new color pattern" in certain breeds... LIKE Plymouth Rocks..... all the colors that are now available...
But the purpose in my comparison is they have to meet certain standards to be called whatever breed they are called...and here is where things like "reputation" that @Jeanne - Simme Valley talks about.... a breeder of chickens will not last long if they sell breeding stock and it does not breed true to what they have sold it as.... so as she said, reputation is VERY IMPORTANT as to what you are selling will do what you say and is what you say it is....
It seems to me that there are not very many "standards" as far as what most cattle are to be called true to type... it all goes to the registration papers and that in and of its self can be very misleading if you want to really slide around the 100 % truth of it..... we all have seen it...

Do breeds like Brangus always breed true once the cross is established? The black in many breeds has come from cross breeding with something black.... but what establishes the type of the angus or the type of the herefords, or the type of the simmentals???? Are there breed standards that they should meet? And if so, were the changes that came about... Bigger taller angus back in the 80-90's.... voted on and agreed and the "standards set " then changed to reflect that????
Many of our beef breeds were established to fit a niche where they were bred... and colors were established that also fit the niche there.... herefords were red and white... PERIOD.... so the breeds were not just a certain type or size but were also a certain color when they were established... Like different breeds of poultry, that people bred to create different color patterns with the same type and other basics.... like leg color, egg color, type and stance..... "black herefords" have been created with the color pattern being dominant... but do they meet the criteria for what a "hereford" build and shape is supposed to look like????

It seems to me that creating a breed called sim-angus should mean that the offspring will have a melding of the two breeds to the point that they will have certain defining characteristics of the 2 breeds together and their off spring will breed true to type... not some more "simmi" and some more "angus"..... when bred to each other...
and yes, then the bulls will contribute 50% to whatever cow they are bred to with her the other 50%....so you are again back to a crossbred animal....
That is why we have "backyard chickens" and purebreds... you get a hodge-podge from the backyard birds and the purebreds should all look pretty much as cookie cutter copies of the parents ..... and the ones that are not very good for type and such should be chicken and dumplins.

Very well said...

 

[simme]

Well then why have registrations at all? Then we wouldn't be paying for what registrations are for, at least.

My thinking - Registrations (papers) are a record of pedigree, individual performance (birth weight, weaning weight, yearling weight, in-herd ratio's of those, etc) and a tabulation of calculated epd's for the animals. That can be valuable information for cattle, whether purebred or crossbred.

My experience is with two breed associations - polled herefords for about 20 years and simmental for about 30 years. They are very different. APHA (now included in AHA) was/is similar to the AAA in organization, haves and have nots, secrecy and swampy, skeptical members, breeding certificates required for AI, lots of employees, run by elites. Just my view and opinion. Simmental association for me is different. Progressive, members are mostly trusting and supportive, no real rich people, open AI with no certificates/fees, programs for commercial producers, promotes crossbreeding and breed improvement, access to everyone, no elites. That's the way I see it.

All that to make this point - a commercial producer who retains replacements (with any breed composition) can enroll his cows in the database, receive registration numbers (papers), submit data just like the "pure' cattle, get calculated epds, gain access to dna testing tied to the information in the database which will lead to more accurate and valuable information with future generations. If a person sees value in data and epd's, then that allows a commercial cow/calf guy to get long term information on his cattle very similar to what a purebred herd would have. I don't think that the AAA or the AHA offers or has interest in offering that level of support for a commercial guy. Again, if you don't see the benefit in data, pedigree, epd's and dna, then there is nothing to be gained. But for a commercial guy looking to retain replacements and make long term improvements based on data, there should be value in a program that provides "papers" and more for crossbred cattle.

Sim-angus is not a breed. There is no defined/required % of simm and angus. There are no foundation animals used to develop a breed. There is no closed herd book after x numbers of generations. Sim-angus is a cross bred with simm and angus in the pedigree with a wide range of %, but comes with "papers", epd's, "breed" support, dna support including enhanced epd's. It is a little more than a "mutt". I would say it is a program, but not a breed. I think the indication of worth is related to acceptance by the industry. I would say that the acceptance of sim-angus is very good - in bull sales, AI studs, replacements, and feedlots. There are even purebred angus AAA breeders that also have sim-angus programs. Why would they have those unless they saw value in them and demand by their customers.

I think those are reasons to have registrations and "papers" on cattle that are not "pure". Some sell for a lot of money like the doodle dogs do.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

The Simmental Assn. encourages DNA testing. They offer whole herd parenting testing at a great discounted pricing. I did my whole herd. Every animal was 100% accurate except for a purchased cow. Ended up, she was bred to a son of the sire listed (a clean up bull).
I had a whole herd of 7-9 frame cows. Extention people would say they were too big. I said, when my buyers are willing to pay high dollars for short, I can make structurally sound, 5 frame mommas in a heart beat.
Finally, the trend changed and I changed my cattle...height, not weight. Cut the legs off, but kept the muscle and soggy easy keeping big volume cows.
I LOVE the style of cattle I have now.
Angus cattle have had oddball in the woodpile forever. Back in the 70s, PB breeders would find a RED calf and would quickly take it out behind the barn and kill it. They didn't understand where it came from, but they didn't want anyone to think his cows weren't PUREBREDS.
We have open registration books. We also have Fullblood reg cattle- they now have to go back 5 generations of fullbloods to be registered as FB. Our assn. differentiates between PB and FB.
You can call my black Simmies whatever you want. You would be hard pressed to DNA any Angus genes in them. Black hide is not DNA Angus. I had black half bloods the first year I bred to imported FB bulls to commercial black cows. Bred to imported FB bulls upgrading to PB over the years. My herd is about half black and half red.
Right now, my reds are my money makers.
My feedlot buyer takes my reds, black and chromed calves, sight unseen. Just bought my steers over the phone for $2.50/#. He said, "they'll weigh up over 700#, won't they". I said yes. "That's OK, I make good money on your cattle".
He has his own butcher shop, and sells mine thru his shop because they easily grade choice.
You all forget or don't know, Simmental is the highest marbling Continental breed, as well as a lean carcass. So, it's easy for me to get YG 2, +Choice carcasses at 12 months old.
It will be interesting next year when we butcher the fall born steers with our adopted PB Angus steer being raised by a PB SImm cow, side by side with our PB Simm steers.

 

[Ebenezer]

Good discussion on type versus pedigree. Nobody says that APA breeds will breed true. There is always the need to fix something in a complicated poultry breed. There is the need to diminish the traits of other breeds used in the past. Most poultry shows have the pair or the single of the flock that was the "best" and I do not think that it/they always represent the source flock. I've fooled with that for decades and there is still some sly of hand in the chickens and the breeds. Large #s of chicks are hatched by many show flocks to find the few that fit the type to be superior.

Proper pedigrees really are the more stable route if all play fair. Within the pedigreed population folks can honestly select the oddballs that match the current fad but the base is still there. With intentional or unintentional outcrosses and superior function to create widespread use there is severe breed damage of purity.

There was a major changer bull born in 1971. The problem was later figured out by some. His maternal granddam was 1/2 Holstein from a fluke of not having proper identification on heifers that were bought. The Holstein was a nurse cow, her heifer looked like the others and there was an accidental swap. The traits that he transmitted were obviously different. It was seen as progress and a step forward. To go back and remove it once it was figures out would likely have taken out a huge amount of registered cattle. Breed associations have not always been wealthy and powerful. To have whacked members and companies with losses might have been the sinking ship. We saw the same with the recent defects and the walking on eggshells.

Dr. Bonsma developed a breed based on type and performance. That was never widely accepted as it took too much thought and effort. I will admit that he was more into function that purity of pedigree as breed up was allowed and inbreeding was avoided.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I was a JR beef superintendent at NY State Fair for many years. One year the Angus Assn. breed rep pulled the papers and disqualified two animals because the sire was not what he was supposed to be. This was probably back in the 80's, maybe 90's. So, yes, I witnessed AAA pulling papers.

 

[wbvs58]

I was a JR beef superintendent at NY State Fair for many years. One year the Angus Assn. breed rep pulled the papers and disqualified two animals because the sire was not what he was supposed to be. This was probably back in the 80's, maybe 90's. So, yes, I witnessed AAA pulling papers.

What does pulling papers mean Jeanne?

Ken

 

[Warren Allison]

What does pulling papers mean Jeanne?

Ken

Cancelled the registration.

 

[wbvs58]

Cancelled the registration.

Sounds like good quality control by the association.

Ken

 

[elkwc]

Each breed has their place. Some buyers in this area don't want more than 25% Continental in what they buy. . An issue I have with breeds today is they have left what separated them from other breeds and now using the same selection criteria of other breeds. There is no advantage to switching. Many are similar in type and size. Many have went extreme on BW. Then those that have added the black color done away with the hybrid vigor gained by crossing. I have looked a many breeds in recent years. Tried Gelbveigh and it didn't work for us. Talked to a Charolais breeder last winter. Looking for the older type that feeders liked so well. He told me they were gone. What he offered is very similar in type and size with the other breeds. No advantage to using them. We have found polled Herefords are like the other breeds in size and type. Some horned Herefords offer what we need and our market wants. It is hard to find Angus bulls in this area with a BW of 85-95 lb like we desire.

 

[simme]

There were some comments that breed associations should require 100% parentage verification in order to register calves. Although that may sound like a good thing, think about the situations and implications.

100% verification to me means verification to both the sire and dam for all calves. That requires both the sire and dam have dna analysis on file with a genetic lab. If the sire is an AI bull, then he most likely has a dna profile already. But if the rare semen used is from a very old bull that died prior to dna technology, then 100% verification is complicated or impossible. That would only affect a very few, but could eliminate their use under 100% verification.

What about registering calves from natural service bulls? That means that a dna sample has to submitted on that sire prior to registering the first calf. Every dam will also need a dna sample submitted before any calves can be registered. Even then, that proves the calf came from those parents, but does not prove that their parentage is correct.

Associations with breed-up programs may allow you to start with any non-registered cow. That complicates 100% verification to the dam.

Then there is the issue of older frozen embryo's from dams that are now deceased and never had dna submitted. A requirement for 100% verification would probably make those embryo's ineligible for registration.

The price for standalone parentage verification from the simmental association (using Neogen) is currently $18 per calf assuming that sire and dam have dna profiles at the lab. Number of calves registered per year times $18 plus the cost of collecting and mailing samples. I think many purebred breeders include parentage verification and I think that can be a selling point for their bulls. But there are lots of little guys with a few registered cattle and kids with a few registered cattle that they show and breed. I suspect that a requirement for dna verification of parentage on ALL calves registered would reduce the number of calves registered from small operations and reduce the number of members due to the cost and effort required.

The simmental association originally referred to themselves as the performance breed. They required weaning weights in order for calves to be registered. I think the idea was to gather more data for better accuracy of epd's and to show evidence of superior growth in the breed to gain market share against lower growth breeds. But they dropped that requirement years ago. Breed associations try to attract young people into their breed since young people will eventually be the old cattle people. Often that starts with showing a calf of some breed. Buying the calf can be a strain on a kid's finances, but buying a set of scales to comply with weaning weights was also a strain. Having a requirement that might cause a young person to choose a different breed or might cause a decline in membership probably has to be balanced against the value of the requirement.

Having 100% of all registered calves verified as to parentage is a great result, but probably not so easy to implement and mandate. Maybe the target should be a little less.

I wish the AI studs would publish the frame scores and current pictures of all of their bulls.

 

[redcowsrule33]

"What about registering calves from natural service bulls? That means that a dna sample has to submitted on that sire prior to registering the first calf. Every dam will also need a dna sample submitted before any calves can be registered. Even then, that proves the calf came from those parents, but does not prove that their parentage is correct."

Red Angus requires it on all walking sires in order for the calves to be registered. Do not have to DNA the calves unless from a multiple sire pasture.

Simmental is making it cheaper to get all your cows and calf crops DNA tested through their current programs. Strongly considering doing it but knowing myself the programs will run out of money before I get my acts together. Mostly because we are small and it will help a little with EPD accuracy.

 

[wbvs58]

In my situation in Australia with Angus, any bull I use by AI or natural service has to have a DNA profile before I can register the calves. I get genomics done on any heifer that I retain for breeding so they also have a DNA profile. My whole cow herd now has a a DNA profile so any heifers I retain are fully parent verified when I do their genomics. I think this would be the case with the majority of registered Angus herds in Australia now. Not every calf I breed is parent verified, only heifers I retain and bulls that I may use plus any others that I may have doubt whether the AI or natural service bull. So far I have not had any that have failed the parent verification. I think this is a good sample of my calves and gives me and anyone that buys from me some confidence that the parents will be right.
This high level of verification has come about voluntarily with Angus Australia, via members wanting to improve the accuracy of EBV's via genomics. The only legislation has been with the requirements of the bulls. Technology has advanced. In the past I am sure there have been errors, accidental and as the mischievious critics of Angus like to imply, intentional but generations pass on very rapidly and the effect of any outside genetics is soon diluted and now we have a high level of verification. Angus are a very big breed and the range of phenotype give you a lot to choose from but I don't think it takes away from the breed.

Ken

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Ken, I sure agree with you on range of phenotype within a breed. It is very imperative that we can offer differences because here in US there is major differences between LOCATIONS of where the cattle will be raised. Texas cattle might not do so well the first year or THREE up here!!! LOL

 

[StrojanHerefords]

In my situation in Australia with Angus, any bull I use by AI or natural service has to have a DNA profile before I can register the calves. I get genomics done on any heifer that I retain for breeding so they also have a DNA profile. My whole cow herd now has a a DNA profile so any heifers I retain are fully parent verified when I do their genomics. I think this would be the case with the majority of registered Angus herds in Australia now. Not every calf I breed is parent verified, only heifers I retain and bulls that I may use plus any others that I may have doubt whether the AI or natural service bull. So far I have not had any that have failed the parent verification. I think this is a good sample of my calves and gives me and anyone that buys from me some confidence that the parents will be right.
This high level of verification has come about voluntarily with Angus Australia, via members wanting to improve the accuracy of EBV's via genomics. The only legislation has been with the requirements of the bulls. Technology has advanced. In the past I am sure there have been errors, accidental and as the mischievious critics of Angus like to imply, intentional but generations pass on very rapidly and the effect of any outside genetics is soon diluted and now we have a high level of verification. Angus are a very big breed and the range of phenotype give you a lot to choose from but I don't think it takes away from the breed.

Ken

I heard a reports of traditional Angus cattle from Scotland being flagged by Angus Australia as having atypical breeding and in the wake of the horsemeat scandal it was found that the traditional English Herefords didn't qualify as Hereford based on the line one profile. At this point what is a Hereford or Angus? At least with Simmentals, they are honest with the fact that they don't know what they are.

The larger issue with breed purity is that Fleckviehs are being sold into CHB and Limousine X Dairy calves are going into CAB.

 

[wbvs58]

I heard a reports of traditional Angus cattle from Scotland being flagged by Angus Australia as having atypical breeding and in the wake of the horsemeat scandal it was found that the traditional English Herefords didn't qualify as Hereford based on the line one profile. At this point what is a Hereford or Angus? At least with Simmentals, they are honest with the fact that they don't know what they are.

The larger issue with breed purity is that Fleckviehs are being sold into CHB and Limousine X Dairy calves are going into CAB.

I haven't heard anything about that but for semen to qualify for use in Australia they would have to have a DNA profile and parents verified. I see nothing wrong with keeping high standards in a breed registry especially these days with widespread use of DNA and genomics. In Australia the highest level of registration of Angus is HBR (Herd Book Recorded), there is also a 2nd registry APR (Angus Performance Registry) Any animal that slips out of the HBR registry is eligible to go into it and also unregistered Angus that are Bred Angus/Angus can enter it and from there on will have their pedigree recorded and also record data and have EBV's just the same as HBR cows. They can never qualify as HBR. A lot of registered breeders will have some APR cows in their herd.

Ken