Where's Doc?

[Chuckie]

Doc,
Do you have the October issue of the Angus Journal???

Please flip the journal over and look at the outside cover. This has been bugging the heck out of me since I received it in the mail.

Please tell me about the heifer on the bottom right.
I feel that she might could be used in a commercail herd if she produces a heavy calf with a very large ribeye area and she holds up. But I would hide her in the back pasture.
But she would never be in my commercail seedstock for improving my heard.
Am I missing something important on this heifer? I actually feel that I don't have to ask that.
Chuckie

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Doc,
Do you have the October issue of the Angus Journal???

Please flip the journal over and look at the outside cover. This has been bugging the heck out of me since I received it in the mail.

Please tell me about the heifer on the bottom right.
I feel that she might could be used in a commercail herd if she produces a heavy calf with a very large ribeye area and she holds up. But I would hide her in the back pasture.
But she would never be in my commercail seedstock for improving my heard.
Am I missing something important on this heifer? I actually feel that I don't have to ask that.
Chuckie

Chuckie-

Yes, I DID see that picture on the Journal when it came out in October. After I caught my breath upon viewing that heifer's picture, I decided that she was in that "Awkard 'Teen-age" stage in her growth pattern -or - she had received more than her share of "Funnel-Butt" genetics!

Or Both!

Insofar as using her as a seedstock product, or even as a commercial producing herd member, I wouldn't even think about it.

BUT! There is one practical use for which this heifer could be a valuable member of the cowherd. That is to use her as an Embryo Transfer Recipient. She would not impart ANY of her genes to her calves, and yet she would have the physical and skeletal characteristics that some geneticists say is preferable for ET work. It would depend on what her EPD's for Calving Ease, Birth Weight, Milk Production and Weaning Weight show. She does display body capacity for carrying a calf by virtue of the fact that she has a reasonable spring of rib and depth of body for a heifer. As an assessment of THIS picture of her, she could benefit with more length of body, but as a three or four year old, she might exhibit that characteristic satisfactorilly. But at this point, it is a guessing game!

DOC HARRIS

 

[Chuckie]

Well said Doc!
Chuckie

 

[Keren]

Either of you guys want to scan the picture of the heifer, so we can see what you are talking about?

Interesting thoughts anyway, Doc

 

[Chuckie]

Keren,
When you click on this URL, scroll down to the heifer on the bottom right. She looks as if she has been hung up by her tail head and let loose right before they took the picture.
Doc's favorite pet peeve :D I just couldn't resist it.
Her back legs are on the straight side, and I don't care for that high head either. Just my thoughts!
http://www.whitestonefarm.com/Chuckie

 

[SEC]

Even the steer jocks would want a tailhead like that. Way to easy topped, looks like an old mare.

 

[Frankie]

I wonder what she sold for?

 

[Chuckie]

I remember the auction that Doc and I had discussed where the bulls were going for high dollars. When the bulls walked, they couldn't get their back legs up under themselves and as they stepped off, their back legs trailed way behind. Some of those bulls were going around $10,000. I think he called it sickle or cow hocked.

That would be a sick feeling to have bought a bull and not caught it before or someone point it out to you after you got him home.

I have noticed some people cannot see differences. I think it is just something in their brain that doesn't let them detect slight differences from the norm.
Chuckie

 

[Keren]

Wow, scary lookin thing.

But, to give her the benefit of the doubt, I have seen a lot of heifers in that pose, mid-stretch. I just wonder whether she wasnt stretching when they took the photo, considering the way she is holding her head as well.

But that leads me on to think why on earth they would put that photo in a catalogue.

Going on the tail head thing, it is a pet peeve of mine also. I've got to say (and I dont mean to criticise you all) I dont understand where the trend in your show ring came from, to glue up the tail heads on animals. It is a highly undesirable trait. Similarly, when I post pictures of my animals on the show board, I often get comments of "She should be more level from hips to pins". Again, this is not a productive trait. We actively select for a slight downwards angle from hips to pins, to aid in calving. It is one of the reasons adding to the easy calving of Bos indicus cattle.

Again, not to criticise you guys, but the angus breeders here are having a few problems of late. All the top guys are using american genetics - but it is creating females with very high, bony tail heads. What we are seeing is that the bulls mount the cows, and the tail head cuts into the bull's chest, hurting him, so he doesnt join with the cow. If that wasnt problem enough, these bulls are learning that mounting causes pain, so they are not working.

Sorry for the novel. I will get off my soap box now. Like I said though, its something that really bugs me.

 

[Chuckie]

Keren, I don't consider you criticizing at all. There is a lot of truth to what you say. A lot of people get caught up in the showring politics and lose their sight on what actually works for producing cattle and making a profit.

She is not something I would bring home. Doc has created "Funnelbuttism" and the bait was there, and I grabbed it. I always like to read what he says about the cattle. He also cracks me up.
Chuckie

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Wow, scary lookin thing.

But, to give her the benefit of the doubt, I have seen a lot of heifers in that pose, mid-stretch. I just wonder whether she wasnt stretching when they took the photo, considering the way she is holding her head as well.

But that leads me on to think why on earth they would put that photo in a catalogue.

Going on the tail head thing, it is a pet peeve of mine also. I've got to say (and I dont mean to criticise you all) I dont understand where the trend in your show ring came from, to glue up the tail heads on animals. It is a highly undesirable trait. Similarly, when I post pictures of my animals on the show board, I often get comments of "She should be more level from hips to pins". Again, this is not a productive trait. We actively select for a slight downwards angle from hips to pins, to aid in calving. It is one of the reasons adding to the easy calving of Bos indicus cattle.

Again, not to criticise you guys, but the angus breeders here are having a few problems of late. All the top guys are using american genetics - but it is creating females with very high, bony tail heads. What we are seeing is that the bulls mount the cows, and the tail head cuts into the bull's chest, hurting him, so he doesnt join with the cow. If that wasnt problem enough, these bulls are learning that mounting causes pain, so they are not working.

Sorry for the novel. I will get off my soap box now. Like I said though, its something that really bugs me.

Keren-

Don't concern yourself one miinute about criticising incompetence! I have been on the receiving end of that kind of rhetoric for many years, but I STILL yowl about "Funnel Butts, High Tail Heads, the stupid act of 'glueing' the hair on the tail heads to make them look even more ridiculous than they really are, cutting back 'ties' and inserting chicken fat in the incision, and other accomplished bits of lying and cheating!

I understand the 'slightly downard angle from hooks to pins to aid in calving', but here is where you must decide what your primary priorities are. The downward slope of the hindquarters also physiologically encourages sickle-hock anatomy, alters the "Beef" phenotype, can be one factor which affects body capacity (for carrying calves, for example) which adversley negates optimal 'functional' traits such as good feet and legs, and , ultimately, longevity. You may think that some of those suggestions are a stretch and picky, however, In My Opinion, being picky, picky, picky about the little things will sometimes abrogate the necessity of spending time and money to compensate for poor breeding decisions.

These important breeding decisions should be made with common sense, logic, good reasoning and pragmatism in mind, rather than copying what some ding-bat thinks is "cutsie" and starts a fad which has not one single factor that improves the "Desirable Eating Experience" of a piece of steak! That's what I mean when I continue to harp on not "throwing out the baby with the bathwater!" Know what is important and adhere to your long-term breeding goals, as long as they are CORRECT objectives, and not just some screwball's platitude that he heard someone else say, who didn't have a clue what he was talking about. Our current Political Debates (What a collection of insulting JOKES those stupid things are!!) are a good example of people who have the WRONG agenda and have their heads where they don't belong! And I mean BOTH Party's! But that is for another completley different day. And there are 337 days left for EVERYBODY to show what fools they are, and for the voters to show what fools THEY are also!

The above paragraph may appear to be off the subject, but it isn't! Breeders must have a correct agenda, a direct goal in mind, and a plan for achieving their objectives, and going off half-cocked on insignificant factors which do not relate to their bottom line of PROFIT is NOT the way to be successful!

DON'T GET ME STA - - - -

DOC HARRIS

 

[KNERSIE]

I understand the 'slightly downard angle from hooks to pins to aid in calving', but here is where you must decide what your primary priorities are. The downward slope of the hindquarters also physiologically encourages sickle-hock anatomy, alters the "Beef" phenotype, can be one factor which affects body capacity (for carrying calves, for example) which adversley negates optimal 'functional' traits such as good feet and legs, and , ultimately, longevity. You may think that some of those suggestions are a stretch and picky, however, In My Opinion, being picky, picky, picky about the little things will sometimes abrogate the necessity of spending time and money to compensate for poor breeding decisions.

Doc, Keren,

It seems I am also in the mood for an argument...

I agree 100% with Keren, we select for exactly the same traits she mentioned for the same reasons, although I have never seen a bull getting hurt mounting a cow with a high boney tailhead. What I have seen though is heifers with high tailheads get fractures when mounted by a heavy bull, the downside to this except the obvious discomfort is that the tailhead will very seldom grow back in the same position and can actually be an obstruction.

Doc, I highlited and underlined "slightly", I, and I am sure also Keren knows what extremes do in breeding, the same goes for slightly lower pins than hooks.

Although I agree with you that an extreme angle will cause structural problems, a slightly angle will actually enhance easy walking ability.

Look at buffaloe,"God's cattle", (including the Cape buffaloe and Indian water buffaloe), all of them have a slight drop from hooks to pins and all of them have a slight sickle hock, and I am sure you know why...... natural selection.

Since buffaloe and cattle have the same amount of chromosomes, this tells me that the natural angle, before the showring fancies or human opinion interfered, was a slight sickle hock with a slight drop hooks to pins. If this wasn't the case the different breeds of buffaloe wouldn't have been around today.

Moderation in all traits will ensure a low imput sustainable beef business in the future, including tailheads.

 

[novatech]

The person that buys this heifer will no doubt go out and brag that he is in the Angus business, he bought a heifer from the whitestone sale and he paid a very high price for it.
What bothers me is that the seller is willing to pass these genetics on to others. Thus more "bottle butts".

 

[Brandonm2]

Don't concern yourself one miinute about criticising incompetence! I have been on the receiving end of that kind of rhetoric for many years, but I STILL yowl about "Funnel Butts, High Tail Heads, the stupid act of 'glueing' the hair on the tail heads to make them look even more ridiculous than they really are, cutting back 'ties' and inserting chicken fat in the incision, and other accomplished bits of lying and cheating!

I should not let my mind think like this; BUT if you were going to go to all the trouble to make an incision......why stick in something like chicken fat? IF you want to go whole hog with your cheating it would make more sense to implant something like a silicon breat implant that you could pump up to the desired size come show time. I am not sure exactly how you would obtain such supplies; but I am sure there are people with both the contacts in the medical world or the ability too duplicate those. It won't turn a funnel butt into a show winner; but in a steer who was already pretty thick in the hind quarters you could make him really impressive. Cover it all up with six inches of thick hair and I doubt anybody catches it.

Our current Political Debates (What a collection of insulting JOKES those stupid things are!!) are a good example of people who have the WRONG agenda and have their heads where they don't belong! And I mean BOTH Party's! But that is for another completley different day. And there are 337 days left for EVERYBODY to show what fools they are, and for the voters to show what fools THEY are also!

You are right about TV debates. Unless you are debating the substantive issues of the day in a really intellectual in depth way (like the Lincoln-Douglas debates) I can not think of a dumber way to pick a president. WHAT other job puts the candidates in a room and lets them attack each other verbally for a couple of hours??? Why would you think the person who was fastest on their feet in such a setting would be the best truck driver, doctor, nurse, cattleman, or school teacher you could hire??? The federal government is the largest employer in the country (probably by a factor of at least twenty). The man we elect will have staff out the yin yang to formulate policy and write legislation. He doesn't (or shouldn't) make decisions on the fly in ten seconds without advice and consultation from staff afterall. What we SHOULD know about a President is WHAT direction does he want to take the country (budgetarily, militarily, ideologically, legislatively, etc), what are his priorities, and how does he propose that he achieve that agenda. Instead we have people attacking people because their position changed on an issue in 1987, Slogans, Insults, denunciations, empty platitudes, wild pronouncements, and very little substance. The goal being too "look presidential". In a perfect world every candidate would be required to prepare a 200 page book with all 4 years of the federal budgets they intend to submit complete with program cuts and tax rates, legislative agenda, domestic agenda, diplomatic agenda, foreign threats, armed forces priorities (ie # of ships and planes, force strength, pay grades, etc) justification for these decisions, and how they intend too accomplish these goals. Most campaigns have the staff too put this together easily. Of course IF they did all the work.........would anybody take the time too read it???

 

[SEC]

I understand the 'slightly downard angle from hooks to pins to aid in calving', but here is where you must decide what your primary priorities are. The downward slope of the hindquarters also physiologically encourages sickle-hock anatomy, alters the "Beef" phenotype, can be one factor which affects body capacity (for carrying calves, for example) which adversley negates optimal 'functional' traits such as good feet and legs, and , ultimately, longevity. You may think that some of those suggestions are a stretch and picky, however, In My Opinion, being picky, picky, picky about the little things will sometimes abrogate the necessity of spending time and money to compensate for poor breeding decisions.

Doc, Keren,

It seems I am also in the mood for an argument...

I agree 100% with Keren, we select for exactly the same traits she mentioned for the same reasons, although I have never seen a bull getting hurt mounting a cow with a high boney tailhead. What I have seen though is heifers with high tailheads get fractures when mounted by a heavy bull, the downside to this except the obvious discomfort is that the tailhead will very seldom grow back in the same position and can actually be an obstruction.

Doc, I highlited and underlined "slightly", I, and I am sure also Keren knows what extremes do in breeding, the same goes for slightly lower pins than hooks.

Although I agree with you that an extreme angle will cause structural problems, a slightly angle will actually enhance easy walking ability.

Look at buffaloe,"God's cattle", (including the Cape buffaloe and Indian water buffaloe), all of them have a slight drop from hooks to pins and all of them have a slight sickle hock, and I am sure you know why...... natural selection.

Since buffaloe and cattle have the same amount of chromosomes, this tells me that the natural angle, before the showring fancies or human opinion interfered, was a slight sickle hock with a slight drop hooks to pins. If this wasn't the case the different breeds of buffaloe wouldn't have been around today.

Moderation in all traits will ensure a low imput sustainable beef business in the future, including tailheads.

You make a good point regarding the buffalo. There are afew sires up here that do an excellent job breeding cows that do just that. Their female progeny are a little cow hocked and have that tail slope. But they are extremely productive females. I can handle a slight slope to even.

What about the cows with the high tailhead, yet they aren't easy topped they have nice hip structure. If you had a laser you would cut the tailhead even and you would be very happy.

We had a few PB's like that that we made commercial.

 

[ollie?]

What we are seeing is that the bulls mount the cows, and the tail head cuts into the bull's chest, hurting him, so he doesnt join with the cow. If that wasnt problem enough, these bulls are learning that mounting causes pain, so they are not working.

Keren personally I would think a bull needs to be more athletic if he's putting that much weight on a cow. I know you're telling the truth but I've never seen a bull that was timid because it hurt his sternum.

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Brandonm2 wrote:


I should not let my mind think like this; BUT if you were going to go to all the trouble to make an incision......why stick in something like chicken fat? IF you want to go whole hog with your cheating it would make more sense to implant something like a silicon breat implant that you could pump up to the desired size come show time. I am not sure exactly how you would obtain such supplies; but I am sure there are people with both the contacts in the medical world or the ability too duplicate those. It won't turn a funnel butt into a show winner; but in a steer who was already pretty thick in the hind quarters you could make him really impressive. Cover it all up with six inches of thick hair and I doubt anybody catches it.

DOC'S ANSWER:

I have to admit that the cutting of back ties goes back to the 1940's with Hereford Cattle (and perhaps others as well). I do not know if that barbaric practice is still in vogue or not.

Hope not!

But the other "exorbitant" practices that breeders, 4H Leaders and FFA Directors are encouraging the young 'skulls full of mush' to utilize to "win at all costs", are nothing more than immoral, dishonest, and crooked. Then, when these kids
grow up and continue to utilize those 'traits' that they have been taught, we throw up our hands, and say, "Goodness Gracious! Where in the World do they learn such terrible actions? Why . . it's disgraceful!"

It sure as heck IS!

"Clean and combed" is what we teach our kids to be. What we seem to be doing is teaching them to be Politicians!!

DOC HARRIS

 

[Chuckie]

If we are judging politicians with funnelbutts, it looks like Hillary wins. Not only is her a$$ filled with chicken fat, but she seems to have had it injected in between her ears.
Chuckie

 

[Keren]

I understand the 'slightly downard angle from hooks to pins to aid in calving', but here is where you must decide what your primary priorities are. The downward slope of the hindquarters also physiologically encourages sickle-hock anatomy, alters the "Beef" phenotype, can be one factor which affects body capacity (for carrying calves, for example) which adversley negates optimal 'functional' traits such as good feet and legs, and , ultimately, longevity. You may think that some of those suggestions are a stretch and picky, however, In My Opinion, being picky, picky, picky about the little things will sometimes abrogate the necessity of spending time and money to compensate for poor breeding decisions.

Doc, the relationship you mentioned here is, I believe, not an area where you have to place emphasis on one trait, but an opportunity to actively select for the slope while selecting against poor feet and leg structure, poor capacity and poor longevity.

I do not know how familiar you are with fine wool production, but it is the same thing here: the two main profit drivers are fleece weight and fibre diameter. However, reducing fibre diameter inherently reduces fleece weight. A producer cannot be profitable if he only selects for one or the other. However, he can be very profitable if he actively selects for both traits.

Again, interesting thoughts everyone. This thread seems to have gone crazy while I was offline.

 

[Chuckie]

Keren,
Yes, this place is crazy!! That is why we come here! DOC HARRIS is the leader, so welcome to his world.
Chuckie :)