Why Angus?

[Frankie]

Go back and read the silly post you just set forth here. It address none of my point or anyone elses. Polled Herefords are still polled(with no Angus influense) Red Polls are still polled(with no Angus influence) Polled Shorthorns are still polled (without Angus influence),Polled Fleckvieh are still polled( without Angus influence)
BTW you cannot say there is no such thing as a (RED) Angus in one breath and then use them as an example in another breath.
I am also not sure Muarry Grey can be characterized as being HALF Angus. Influenced maybe but half, maybe not.

I have said it befor and I will say it again. You are once again hoisted on your own petard.

:roll: I never said Angus was the only polled breed. I asked if you wanted to discuss the breeds that had used Angus to become polled. Apparently you don't.

Polled Herefords are no longer a BREED. They're a variation of Herefords, which is a horned breed.

You're so dishonest. I've never said there was no such thing as a Red Angus. I said they aren't Angus....they're Red Angus. Though up to a point they have the same history as American Angus, they have a different registry and are certainly a polled breed.

Murrey Greys were established using a Shorthorn cow and several Angus bulls. Last I knew, they still allow "breeding up" and Angus has been popular in the breeding up cycle.

But keep on working, you may actually make a point some day. "Even a blind hog finds an acron now and then" they tell me.

 

[HerefordSire]

:shock: :shock: :shock:

 

[Brandonm22]

But it's true that not all Angus gain well, and we're working on that. Today we performance test more bulls than any other breed. Look at the bull test stations operating around the country and you'll see that Angus are competitive with other breeds, while producing quality carcasses.

Frankie I don't disagree with any of that. In fact the last round of MARC testing I saw had Angus steers outgaining most of the continentals postweaning.....their sisters also were heavier as mature cows than the other breeds. Angus made their mark as a mother cow breed. You keep slapping more growth, more growth, more milk, more milk into those Angus bulls at some point you are going to end up with Angus cows with maintenance requirements that the commercial cow man can not afford. I would argue that there are several popular bloodlines that are past that point NOW.

 

[3waycross]

Go back and read the silly post you just set forth here. It address none of my point or anyone elses. Polled Herefords are still polled(with no Angus influense) Red Polls are still polled(with no Angus influence) Polled Shorthorns are still polled (without Angus influence),Polled Fleckvieh are still polled( without Angus influence)
BTW you cannot say there is no such thing as a (RED) Angus in one breath and then use them as an example in another breath.
I am also not sure Muarry Grey can be characterized as being HALF Angus. Influenced maybe but half, maybe not.

I have said it befor and I will say it again. You are once again hoisted on your own petard.

:roll: I never said Angus was the only polled breed. I asked if you wanted to discuss the breeds that had used Angus to become polled. Apparently you don't.
They used Angus to become BLACK polled was just a side effect. You know as well as I do that BLACK hide sells even if it is aBLACK hide full of garbage

Polled Herefords are no longer a BREED. They're a variation of Herefords, which is a horned breed.

They didn't stop being a breed because you say so. So you are saying they are registered in the same breed assn as herefords ; just like those frame 10 Holstein/Angus are all registered as REAL Angus

You're so dishonest. I've never said there was no such thing as a Red Angus. I said they aren't Angus....they're Red Angus. Though up to a point they have the same history as American Angus, they have a different registry and are certainly a polled breed.

Frankie if a BLACK registered ANGUS cow has a RED calf and it gets registered in the RED Angus ASSN when did it stop being an ANGUS


Funny how when someone has no other recourse they resort to name calling. Be careful how you throw around words like DISHONEST
You start these threads knowing full well that you will get a certain amount of crap and when all else fails you resort to calling people NAMES.

Murrey Greys were established using a Shorthorn cow and several Angus bulls. Last I knew, they still allow "breeding up" and Angus has been popular in the breeding up cycle.

But keep on working, you may actually make a point some day. "Even a blind hog finds an acron now and then" they tell me.

What happened Frankie did I get a little close to where you live with that post. Oh the name calling, now you are refering to me as a hog too. I would have expected more from a moderator, than name calling.

 

[ANAZAZI]

From this it can be established that heterosis does much more for growth traits than for carcass traits; And that angus cattle albeit as marbled as the herefords, are not as feed efficient.

Please continue comparing the colour of one horse to the speed of the other horse.

I didn't realize I was ever part of the heterosis conversation. I was chipping in my two bits for "why angus". Why are we talking about horses?

Comparing different aspects like colour and speed; forget the horses, I mean there are a few people here discussing completely different subjects.
And thanks novatech for writing what I was thinking.

 

[rocket2222]

So those hundreds of references you claimed showed I didn't know what I was talking about were just figments of your imagination? Little hint for you: So is this comment.

Two of the links I posted clearly showed that feedlot gain was NOT improved by crossbreeding.



It takes a lot of money to have all these "independent studies" conducted, probably why the Angus Association had to raise its fees. Hers one done by the AHA, with a little different outcome.

 

[rocket2222]

Polled Herefords are no longer a BREED. They're a variation of Herefords, which is a horned breed.

That's incorrect. It is the American Hereford Association. Both horned and polled breeds are recognized by the association. Reg. # are different for polled and horned. The polled get a "p" prefix reg. #.

 

[HerefordSire]

Polled Herefords are no longer a BREED. They're a variation of Herefords, which is a horned breed.

That's incorrect. It is the American Hereford Association. Both horned and polled breeds are recognized by the association. Reg. # are different for polled and horned. The polled get a "p" prefix reg. #.

The Horned Herefords originated from Angus...or was it the Angus orginated from Horned Herefords in 8833 BC?

 

[JHH]

Frankie,

Why dont you prove yourself wrong. Why dont you take 10 head or more and breed them to a bull of your choice but NOT BLACK and then raise them with another group of your straight bred angus. I may be wrong but I think you will have bigger weaning weights on the crossbred calves.

 

[novatech]

In regard to an earlier post. Frankie is right on. Highly heritable traits have little to no effect on heterosis. Therefore quality is not increased due to heterosis. On the other hand where Frankie is wrong is that ADG is not a highly heritable trait. It is considered, by most, to be moderately heritable. This is more evident the farther apart the gene pool becomes. Bos Taurus X Bos Taurus will not show much addition to ADG but Bos Taurus X Bos Indicus will.

So those hundreds of references you claimed showed I didn't know what I was talking about were just figments of your imagination? Little hint for you: So is this comment.

Two of the links I posted clearly showed that feedlot gain was NOT improved by crossbreeding. I pay a lot of attention to feedlot gain. It's important to me. Over the years I've asked "experts" from various agencies about the influence of crossbreeding on feedlot gain. Watching bull tests and comparing the gains there to average feedlot gains, it just didn't make any sense to me. Yes, I understand bulls feed differently. Yes, I understand that "average" in feedlots covers a lot of variation in cattle, but still..... So finally I asked the question here at Cattle Today and someone (maybe Dun?) gave me this link:

http://pods.dasnr.okstate.edu/docushare ... 150web.pdf

It's an OK State University report that says clearly "Highly heritable traits like feed efficiency and carcass quality exhibit little or no heterosis." I've been very grateful for that link. It scratched an itch that had been worrying me for a long time. Since then, I've found more articles saying the same thing. Why do you insist in refusing to acknowledge these scientific/research papers? Is it because they don't say what you want?

There is no doubt that Angus can add quality to meat. I also have no doubt that an Angus can be bred up or down to just about anything one desires. It is just a matter of using the genetics to do so and having enough time in ones life to accomplish it.
Angus, have excelled in feed lot tests for ADG and the quality grade produced. They are awarded top prices for doing so. There is another side of the coin. Even though they bring a higher price per pound of edible on the plate beef it is produced at a higher cost. Angus are lacking in feed efficiency. There are other breeds that excel in feed efficiency but lack the quality grade meat of Angus which also translates into dollars. It is simply a choice as to what direction the producer wants to go or what that individual producer finds more profitable.
You can breed better feed efficiency into Angus, or breed higher quality into more feed efficient cattle through properly selected cross breeding.

:roll: As a breed, Angus is feed efficient. Feedlots know it. When Angus were first brought to the US, they were considered freaks because they had no horns. It was their ability to gain on feed that made their mark in the US beef industry.

But it's true that not all Angus gain well, and we're working on that. Today we performance test more bulls than any other breed. Look at the bull test stations operating around the country and you'll see that Angus are competitive with other breeds, while producing quality carcasses.

I am not going to do your homework but will give you one link that hopefully will educate you a little. http://www.mtbeefnetwork.org/arnr230/qu ... Cattle.pdf
You have not convinced me.
I have even taken the time to research this to see if I was wrong. I did not find that to be the case.

 

[dun]

Hasn;t everyone shown how far they can pee by now? No one will change their minds so why not let it rest?

 

[novatech]

Hasn;t everyone shown how far they can pee by now? No one will change their minds so why not let it rest?

Arguing is probably my worst fault.
:frowns:

 

[hillsdown]

I am surprised it lasted this long aready without the

 

[Angus Cowman]

Heres my 2cents

wouldn't it be a dull world if we only had 1 breed of cattle or drove 1 brand of truck
I have said it before I run angus because they work for me and I get along with them, if you want to run herf,limi, Murray grey or any other breed that is fine I may give ya a hard time about it in jest but hey that is the fun of it

Lighten up people and enjoy your cows

 

[Zacky]

Carcass EPDs are evaluated at an age constant endpoint, which means that the ribeye area (REA) EPD is expressed at a constant age. However, in the real world, REA at a constant age has no pratical application. What is important is REA relative to carcass weight, which is how the Yield Grade (YG) formula works and how value is determined. Expressing REA EPDs at a constant age leads to various biases, for example, high growth, but light muscled cattle can, and often do, have positive REA EPDs.

In 1999 I expressed concern to the American Angus Association (AAA) that the bias in the age constant endpoint would result in REA EPDs that are flawed and misleading for real world applications. Now, it's ten years later, and the trends established are clear and predictably disturbing--REA EPDs are increasing year over year (in 1995, the average REA EPD was -.05, in 2008 the average REA EPD was +.17) while the kill data show that REA relative to carcass weight is decreasing. Some back of the envelope calculations follow to supoort this claim.

For steers harvested between 360 to 480 days of age, the Fall 1999 Sire Evaluation shows about 30,000 steers in the database with an average carcass weight of 762 pounds and an average REA of 12.43 square inches. The YG formula shows that a 762 pound carcass needs 12.95 square inches of REA to be "average", so this age group of cattle in the database in 1999 were .52 square inches below average.

Similarly, for steers harvested between 360 to 480 days of age, the Fall 2009 Sire Evaluation shows nearly 58,000 steers in the database with an average carcass weight of 779 pounds and an average REA of 12.47 square inches. When the 30,000 steers included in the 1999 database are removed from consideration, the approximately 28,000 steers placed in the database between 1999 and 2009 should have an average carcass weight of 797 pounds and an average REA of 12.51 square inches. The YG formula shows that a 797 pound carcass needs 13.36 square inches of REA to be "average", so the steers that entered the database between 1999 and 2009 are .85 square inches below "average".

In the last 10 years, the REA EPD has increased significantly (.2 square inches), while the kill data show that REA has actually decreased by .33 square inches on a carcass weight basis. In order for REA EPDs to be meaningful, it should be clear that we need something better than the current REA EPDs. We need a REA EPD that is expressed relative to carcass weight, preferably using the YG formula as the standard for evaluation.

The USDA Quality Grades establish the standard for the increments used in both marbling evaluation and marbling EPDs. Likewise, the YG formula should be established as the standard for the evaluation of REA EPDs.

Under this proposed scenario, consider the following example. Two bulls, A and B, with progeny evaluated at an age constant endpoint, each have an average progeny REA of 13.1 square inches. (Under the curent system, their REA EPDs would be the same.) However, Bull A's progeny have an average carcass weight of 800 pounds while Bull B's progeny have an average carcass weight of 750 pounds. According to the YG formula, an 800 pound carcass needs 13.4 square inches of REA to be average, while a 750 pound carcass needs 12.8 square inches to be average. Under the new proposal, Bull A would have a REA EPD of
-.30 (13.1 - 13.4) while Bull B would have a REA EPD of +.30 (13.1 - 12.8).

It should be a fairly straightforward exercise to analyse the data to create REA EPDs as suggested to determine if these EPDs more accurately describe the trend expressed in the kill data. It may be necessary to evaluate the data with various endpoints (age, backfat, carcass weight) to discover which endpoint most accurately describes the data when REA EPDs are expressed relative to the YG formula.

I have shared these concerns once again with the AAA. One lonely voice will not be enough to cause change. If you agree that REA EPD evaluation needs to be examined, and likely changed, then please pass the word. Perhaps the collective voice of the AAA membership can have success with staff and directors to facilitate change.

Bobby Grove
White Ridge Angus

 

[KMacGinley]

That certainly explains a lot! Why YGs are going up so dramatically while all these carcass curvebending wonder bulls are being used so extensively.

 

[3waycross]

Read it and weep Frankie. The crosses work. This is where the argument started for me, and this is where it ends. The cross and especially the GV/Angus not only works but works WELL.
BTW is it just me or has anyone else noticed Frankie almost NEVER has anything good to say about anyone else's cattle or breed? Funny thing, HUH

VIDEO MARKET

A set of Angus-Gelbvieh cross feeder steers topped the market at the Superior Livestock Video Royale XVII Sale held July 27-31 in Winnemucca, Nev. Broadcast live from the Winnemucca Convention Center, the video auction had producers from 27 states consign over 238,000 head of calves, feeder cattle and breeding stock, according to Superior Livestock Auction.
Powles Gelbvieh Ranch, Bingham, Neb., consigned a set of 100 weaned steer calves at a base weight of 490 pounds that sold for $124, topping the market of that sale. The April born feeder steers were sold with a one percent shrink for delivery in early November.

A second set of 184 Powles Ranch Angus-Gelbvieh weaned steers weighing 530 pounds sold for $115.00, which was just shy of the $116.50 market high for that region and weight range.

The Powles Gelbvieh Ranch breeding program fully utilizes the benefits of the Angus-Gelbvieh cross in their commercial herd. The cowherd consists of Angus and Angus-Gelbvieh cross cows that are bred to Balancer™ bulls, said Bryon Powles.

"We maintain a cross of Angus and Gelbvieh by breeding to Balancer bulls and taking advantage of hybrid vigor," commented Powles. "With straight Angus, you lose the hybrid vigor. By using Balancer herd bulls, we add growth to the calves."

Besides having the right combination of genetics, the Powles have been able to get a premium for their calves by selling steers that are guaranteed to be weaned at least 30 days at time of delivery.

"We've been selling weaned calves for the past three or four years and have noticed a price premium for a little bit of extra effort," said Powles.

Dustin Rippe, CattleFax analyst, attributes the market success of Powles feeder calves to several factors.

"This is a prime example of what the combination of good genetics and a tremendous reputation can have on market price," said Rippe. "Powles calves are meeting what the industry is looking for; the right genetics from a Continental-British breed cross can produce premiums. Plus, they sold at the top of the seasonal market."

Consigning to Superior Livestock Auction for the past 10 years, the Powles Ranch enjoys the convenience and flexibility of a video auction. According to Bryon, the video auction offers several benefits including eliminating any sale barn stress on the calves, the opportunity to sell early when the market is high, and the comfort of watching the sale from home. In addition the Powles like the fact that with a video auction they have been able to develop a relationship with buyers.

"With the video auction, you deal directly with the buyers. When the sale is over, you know where your calves are going," said Powles.

For anyone considering using a video auction market, Bryon recommends it. He suggests that if you are comfortable predicting the weight of the calves to try it one year and see what a difference it can make.

 

[Santas and Duhram Reds]

From this it can be established that heterosis does much more for growth traits than for carcass traits; And that angus cattle albeit as marbled as the herefords, are not as feed efficient.

Please continue comparing the colour of one horse to the speed of the other horse.

I didn't realize I was ever part of the heterosis conversation. I was chipping in my two bits for "why angus". Why are we talking about horses?

Comparing different aspects like colour and speed; forget the horses, I mean there are a few people here discussing completely different subjects.
And thanks novatech for writing what I was thinking.

I realize you were not talking about horses. I did not realize however that I wasn't allowed to put in my two cents on the origin of the thread of "why angus". As you said, lots of different topics have been mentioned. Are mine not as valid or worthy to be mentioned?

 

[Red Bull Breeder]

Houstoncutter Hycountry Wrangler was a proto carrier. Not all of his off spring were carriers. But it is still the reason why most breeders try to go back to Polled Wonder instead of Wrangler. Like if you use Velocity he will have no Wrangler, as he was Primoxpolled Wonder son. There was several more polled bulls out of polled Wonder like Gunsmoke, Southern Cross, Ok Fuel and a half dozen others i don't recall right now.

 

[novatech]

Carcass EPDs are evaluated at an age constant endpoint, which means that the ribeye area (REA) EPD is expressed at a constant age. However, in the real world, REA at a constant age has no pratical application. What is important is REA relative to carcass weight, which is how the Yield Grade (YG) formula works and how value is determined. Expressing REA EPDs at a constant age leads to various biases, for example, high growth, but light muscled cattle can, and often do, have positive REA EPDs.

In 1999 I expressed concern to the American Angus Association (AAA) that the bias in the age constant endpoint would result in REA EPDs that are flawed and misleading for real world applications. Now, it's ten years later, and the trends established are clear and predictably disturbing--REA EPDs are increasing year over year (in 1995, the average REA EPD was -.05, in 2008 the average REA EPD was +.17) while the kill data show that REA relative to carcass weight is decreasing. Some back of the envelope calculations follow to supoort this claim.

For steers harvested between 360 to 480 days of age, the Fall 1999 Sire Evaluation shows about 30,000 steers in the database with an average carcass weight of 762 pounds and an average REA of 12.43 square inches. The YG formula shows that a 762 pound carcass needs 12.95 square inches of REA to be "average", so this age group of cattle in the database in 1999 were .52 square inches below average.

Similarly, for steers harvested between 360 to 480 days of age, the Fall 2009 Sire Evaluation shows nearly 58,000 steers in the database with an average carcass weight of 779 pounds and an average REA of 12.47 square inches. When the 30,000 steers included in the 1999 database are removed from consideration, the approximately 28,000 steers placed in the database between 1999 and 2009 should have an average carcass weight of 797 pounds and an average REA of 12.51 square inches. The YG formula shows that a 797 pound carcass needs 13.36 square inches of REA to be "average", so the steers that entered the database between 1999 and 2009 are .85 square inches below "average".

In the last 10 years, the REA EPD has increased significantly (.2 square inches), while the kill data show that REA has actually decreased by .33 square inches on a carcass weight basis. In order for REA EPDs to be meaningful, it should be clear that we need something better than the current REA EPDs. We need a REA EPD that is expressed relative to carcass weight, preferably using the YG formula as the standard for evaluation.

The USDA Quality Grades establish the standard for the increments used in both marbling evaluation and marbling EPDs. Likewise, the YG formula should be established as the standard for the evaluation of REA EPDs.

Under this proposed scenario, consider the following example. Two bulls, A and B, with progeny evaluated at an age constant endpoint, each have an average progeny REA of 13.1 square inches. (Under the curent system, their REA EPDs would be the same.) However, Bull A's progeny have an average carcass weight of 800 pounds while Bull B's progeny have an average carcass weight of 750 pounds. According to the YG formula, an 800 pound carcass needs 13.4 square inches of REA to be average, while a 750 pound carcass needs 12.8 square inches to be average. Under the new proposal, Bull A would have a REA EPD of
-.30 (13.1 - 13.4) while Bull B would have a REA EPD of +.30 (13.1 - 12.8).

It should be a fairly straightforward exercise to analyse the data to create REA EPDs as suggested to determine if these EPDs more accurately describe the trend expressed in the kill data. It may be necessary to evaluate the data with various endpoints (age, backfat, carcass weight) to discover which endpoint most accurately describes the data when REA EPDs are expressed relative to the YG formula.

I have shared these concerns once again with the AAA. One lonely voice will not be enough to cause change. If you agree that REA EPD evaluation needs to be examined, and likely changed, then please pass the word. Perhaps the collective voice of the AAA membership can have success with staff and directors to facilitate change.

Bobby Grove
White Ridge Angus

That's an eye opener.
REA was supposed to be a value that represented the total package. One would normally assume if the REA was good then the rest of the animal would be proportionally the same. Guess not.