Why Herefords are Vanishing

[alacattleman]

I bet the queen sometimes wish she had rather culled him at weaning.

fortunitly princes diana was a looker. to help knock the edge of his sons :lol:

 

[redfornow]

A year or so back, I resolved to no longer get into any extensive discussion with you about cattle breeding, HS. I think it was the mostly useless Fibonacci/Golden Mean discussion that prompted that resolution.

Now, I just occasionally feel compelled to throw the BS flag on you when you stray completely out into left field, mainly as a caution to any of the newcomers to CT who might mistakenly think that you have the smallest clue about what you're talking about - at least when it comes to CATTLE BREEDING!

But go ahead and rattle on if you must!

George

Yep... Until I see some pictures for some real cattle.

HS is a paper farmer, and we all know how I feel about paper?

 

[KNERSIE]

I bet the queen sometimes wish she had rather culled him at weaning.

fortunitly princes diana was a looker. to help knock the edge of his sons :lol:

Being inbred Charles is rather prepotent and unfortunately passed his mental ability on to Harry.

 

[WhiteFacesPay]

Paper breeders are a scary thing!

Picasso pedigree????

I guess if I was wanting some 8-10 oz highly marbled T-bones for my own use I could see using his sire. Linebred Endurance a bull most of us would have thawed out and thrown away. I think (or hope) most breeders would see a bull that is practically devoid of milk and muscle. A +2 milk (a 6 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 476 daughters recording calves. A -.34 REA ( a -.12 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 376 scans recorded. The amount of data recorded to achieve these horrible numbers leads me to believe it is more than a paper figure. Where the logic comes in to double this up in a pedigree and market his semen I do not know.

We as Hereford breeders do not need to be continentals. However there are still a lot of Hereford cattle out there that are lacking in muscling. Propagating cattle in the bottom percentile of the breed in REA and muscle holds us all back. Propagating a 2 milk EPD I suppose would be fine in a terminal sire but not much else.

Having cattle in the bottom 5% of the breed for REA calculated out to be breed leaders for the CHB index is just wrong. If your goal is to produce highly marbled cattle with loins the size of a hogs why not just raise waygu?

Hereford sire you are a fool - the scary thing is there are a lot of paper breeders out there like you!

No disrespect to the breeder of this calf - I'd guess by the dam side - you have a pretty good cow there - but would have to see her first before declaring she has produced the next great one. If this calf is half as good as HS thinks - sure love to see what she would produce with a bull that throws some meat into his calves with out detracting from all she already has going for her.

 

[alacattleman]

why the title of the thread change?

 

[HerefordSire]

A year or so back, I resolved to no longer get into any extensive discussion with you about cattle breeding, HS. I think it was the mostly useless Fibonacci/Golden Mean discussion that prompted that resolution.

Now, I just occasionally feel compelled to throw the BS flag on you when you stray completely out into left field, mainly as a caution to any of the newcomers to CT who might mistakenly think that you have the smallest clue about what you're talking about - at least when it comes to CATTLE BREEDING!

But go ahead and rattle on if you must!

George

There was an old saying in college....RATTLE RATTLE here come the CATTLE. Phi Mu...Phi Mu. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

I think comparing $BMI profit indices of the highest and lowest young Hereford bull prospects, with all other things being equal, in Pan America to make a point hits home, which could explain why you chose to ignore the simple question, which is fine.

Ancestor mix is an art that was perfected by the breeder of this bull according to the scientists, the math professionals, and the cattle markets. Sure, it is all on a paper pedigree and selection or phenotype is not taken into consideration, yet, but only because I haven't got there. As you know, I didn't make the rules or formulas for ranking the probabilities of animals based upon their ancestors to outperform their peers. I simply choose to think they know more than the majority of breeders that ignore the information, or straddle the fence, so to speak.

 

[redfornow]

why the title of the thread change?

:clap:

 

[KNERSIE]

Paper breeders are a scary thing!

Picasso pedigree????

I guess if I was wanting some 8-10 oz highly marbled T-bones for my own use I could see using his sire. Linebred Endurance a bull most of us would have thawed out and thrown away. I think (or hope) most breeders would see a bull that is practically devoid of milk and muscle. A +2 milk (a 6 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 476 daughters recording calves. A -.34 REA ( a -.12 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 376 scans recorded. The amount of data recorded to achieve these horrible numbers leads me to believe it is more than a paper figure. Where the logic comes in to double this up in a pedigree and market his semen I do not know.

We as Hereford breeders do not need to be continentals. However there are still a lot of Hereford cattle out there that are lacking in muscling. Propagating cattle in the bottom percentile of the breed in REA and muscle holds us all back. Propagating a 2 milk EPD I suppose would be fine in a terminal sire but not much else.

Having cattle in the bottom 5% of the breed for REA calculated out to be breed leaders for the CHB index is just wrong. If your goal is to produce highly marbled cattle with loins the size of a hogs why not just raise waygu?

Hereford sire you are a fool - the scary thing is there are a lot of paper breeders out there like you!

No disrespect to the breeder of this calf - I'd guess by the dam side - you have a pretty good cow there - but would have to see her first before declaring she has produced the next great one. If this calf is half as good as HS thinks - sure love to see what she would produce with a bull that throws some meat into his calves with out detracting from all she already has going for her.

Nice to meet you too! What an introduction!

I agree with you that we certainly don't need to make continentals out of herefords and that the profit indeces are about as usefull as a chocolate piszpot and that the vast majority of the breed can do with more muscle.

I also agree with your second last paragraph. :secret:

I don't agree with how you run your mouth about the breeding decisions LFF has made when you know absolutely nothing about his program or why he has made the decisions he had made. In my opinion LFF is an innocent bystander in this thread, he didn't ask to be made the talk of the town, and probably is blissfully unaware of this thread and its not our business to discuss him or his breeding decisions behind his back.

 

[HerefordSire]

that's true but, he looks like ass with ears

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

It just does to show you, that you can have the most powerful being on earth without knowing the performance before hand.

 

[HerefordSire]

I want this to be clear! For me, this discussion has very little to do with LFF or his bull. It has to do with the validity of placing a whole lot of value on low accuracy EPDs and profit indices with no regard to phenotype or other important traits. It has everything to do with the credibility of the "theory" and, for that matter, the theorist.

If LFF had posted this thread, I might have had the same questions, but I would have had a different attitude in how I approached them. LFF is a do-er, not just a theorist! And, even though I may not 100% agree with LFF's approach or his priorities in cattle breeding, any disagreement I would have would have been tempered with a healthy measure of respect for his efforts and his philosophy.

George

The invisible air is there. We breath it but we cannot see it. The reason why I know this to be a true is because I studied it and choose to believe the scientists. Could they be pulling the wool over my eyes? I guess so.

 

[Herefords.US]

Paper breeders are a scary thing!

Picasso pedigree????

I guess if I was wanting some 8-10 oz highly marbled T-bones for my own use I could see using his sire. Linebred Endurance a bull most of us would have thawed out and thrown away. I think (or hope) most breeders would see a bull that is practically devoid of milk and muscle. A +2 milk (a 6 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 476 daughters recording calves. A -.34 REA ( a -.12 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 376 scans recorded. The amount of data recorded to achieve these horrible numbers leads me to believe it is more than a paper figure. Where the logic comes in to double this up in a pedigree and market his semen I do not know.

We as Hereford breeders do not need to be continentals. However there are still a lot of Hereford cattle out there that are lacking in muscling. Propagating cattle in the bottom percentile of the breed in REA and muscle holds us all back. Propagating a 2 milk EPD I suppose would be fine in a terminal sire but not much else.

Having cattle in the bottom 5% of the breed for REA calculated out to be breed leaders for the CHB index is just wrong. If your goal is to produce highly marbled cattle with loins the size of a hogs why not just raise waygu?

Hereford sire you are a fool - the scary thing is there are a lot of paper breeders out there like you!

No disrespect to the breeder of this calf - I'd guess by the dam side - you have a pretty good cow there - but would have to see her first before declaring she has produced the next great one. If this calf is half as good as HS thinks - sure love to see what she would produce with a bull that throws some meat into his calves with out detracting from all she already has going for her.

Nice to meet you too! What an introduction!

I agree with you that we certainly don't need to make continentals out of herefords and that the profit indeces are about as usefull as a chocolate piszpot and that the vast majority of the breed can do with more muscle.

I also agree with your second last paragraph. :secret:

I don't agree with how you run your mouth about the breeding decisions LFF has made when you know absolutely nothing about his program or why he has made the decisions he had made. In my opinion LFF is an innocent bystander in this thread, he didn't ask to be made the talk of the town, and probably is blissfully unaware of this thread and its not our business to discuss him or his breeding decisions behind his back.

By making blanket judgments about this bull based on his EPDs and ancestry without actually seeing him, or even a picture, I feel WhiteFacesPay is making the same mistake that HS did!

But at least we all agree about HS! :help:

George

 

[HerefordSire]

I bet the queen sometimes wish she had rather culled him at weaning.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

The Queen controlled the entire "selection" process of the event in question. She was aware of the phenotypic consequences prior to her selection event. She could have selected from the wealthiest Kings on earth or the ugliest men on earth.

 

[HerefordSire]

fortunitly princes diana was a looker. to help knock the edge of his sons :lol:

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Another good one Bammy!

Princess Diana was also related to the King of David. In other words, Prince Charles sons are line-bred King David. I would say Prince Charles was trying to create a more potent blood line. In the same tone, Felton's 517 can be traced many times in this great bull prospect. The fertile ability of 517 is documented thoroughly. Is 517 of royal Herefore blood?

 

[alacattleman]

I bet the queen sometimes wish she had rather culled him at weaning.

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

The Queen controlled the entire "selection" process of the event in question. She was aware of the phenotypic consequences prior to her selection event. She could have selected from the wealthiest Kings on earth or the ugliest men on earth.

you know this for a fact, cause he could have been born with two heads for all she new..........thank god one was to much

 

[HerefordSire]

Yep... Until I see some pictures for some real cattle.

HS is a paper farmer, and we all know how I feel about paper?

This is an intangible discussion of a great bull prospect not marketing encouragement. It is OK if you do not believe there is value without seeing the prospect. At the same time, by looking at the previous ancestors, most of us can see a high amount of potential talent and performance without seeing the prospect.

 

[ANAZAZI]

Paper breeders are a scary thing!

Picasso pedigree????

I guess if I was wanting some 8-10 oz highly marbled T-bones for my own use I could see using his sire. Linebred Endurance a bull most of us would have thawed out and thrown away. I think (or hope) most breeders would see a bull that is practically devoid of milk and muscle. A +2 milk (a 6 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 476 daughters recording calves. A -.34 REA ( a -.12 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 376 scans recorded. The amount of data recorded to achieve these horrible numbers leads me to believe it is more than a paper figure. Where the logic comes in to double this up in a pedigree and market his semen I do not know.

We as Hereford breeders do not need to be continentals. However there are still a lot of Hereford cattle out there that are lacking in muscling. Propagating cattle in the bottom percentile of the breed in REA and muscle holds us all back. Propagating a 2 milk EPD I suppose would be fine in a terminal sire but not much else.

Having cattle in the bottom 5% of the breed for REA calculated out to be breed leaders for the CHB index is just wrong. If your goal is to produce highly marbled cattle with loins the size of a hogs why not just raise waygu?

Hereford sire you are a fool - the scary thing is there are a lot of paper breeders out there like you!

No disrespect to the breeder of this calf - I'd guess by the dam side - you have a pretty good cow there - but would have to see her first before declaring she has produced the next great one. If this calf is half as good as HS thinks - sure love to see what she would produce with a bull that throws some meat into his calves with out detracting from all she already has going for her.

Here we go again!

 

[RD-Sam]

I can breed the best animal on paper too, and so can anyone else, all you need is the best cow on paper and the best bull on paper, and breed them. The real achievement comes when you breed two and they produce offspring that actually perform, and are actually the best.

And where are some of those pictures of your cattle anyway...HS? :cowboy:

Do you think the Hereford breed is disappearing because people ignore the papers? From all that I gather talking to many angus breeders, the angus breed got itself into trouble by putting too much into the papers. I'm on a little different course now, but not ignoring the papers.

 

[HerefordSire]

First off, welcome aboard White FacesPay!

Paper breeders are a scary thing!

Do you look at paper pedigrees before you choose a breeding animal?

Picasso pedigree????

Yes. 517 traces back many times. This prospect could produce a highly fertile low birth weight consistant product for hardworking ranchers needing dependability.

I guess if I was wanting some 8-10 oz highly marbled T-bones for my own use I could see using his sire.

Don't forget, this bull prospect could outperform his sire. It makes my mouth "snake" just thinking about the possibilities.

Linebred Endurance a bull most of us would have thawed out and thrown away. I think (or hope) most breeders would see a bull that is practically devoid of milk and muscle. A +2 milk (a 6 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 476 daughters recording calves. A -.34 REA ( a -.12 would make him the bottom 5% of the breed) with 376 scans recorded. The amount of data recorded to achieve these horrible numbers leads me to believe it is more than a paper figure. Where the logic comes in to double this up in a pedigree and market his semen I do not know.

Finally! Now we are getting somewhere. Very good objections. The answer may lie in looking deeper in the pedigree even before 517 as in the case of 774. Guess what? They meet in a highly fertile famous linebred bull!

We as Hereford breeders do not need to be continentals. However there are still a lot of Hereford cattle out there that are lacking in muscling. Propagating cattle in the bottom percentile of the breed in REA and muscle holds us all back. Propagating a 2 milk EPD I suppose would be fine in a terminal sire but not much else.

What kind of odds are we talking about here for this bull prospect based upon all the ancestors?

Having cattle in the bottom 5% of the breed for REA calculated out to be breed leaders for the CHB index is just wrong. If your goal is to produce highly marbled cattle with loins the size of a hogs why not just raise waygu?

The bull prospect is not a breed leader for CHB or CEZ. This doesn't mean he can't sire 1,000 calves without a birthing issue. Does it?

Hereford sire you are a fool - the scary thing is there are a lot of paper breeders out there like you!

I do not think you are a fool. As a metter of fact, I believe you are very brave. Again, do you look at paper pedigrees before you choose a breeding animal?

No disrespect to the breeder of this calf - I'd guess by the dam side - you have a pretty good cow there - but would have to see her first before declaring she has produced the next great one. If this calf is half as good as HS thinks - sure love to see what she would produce with a bull that throws some meat into his calves with out detracting from all she already has going for her.

Judging by the Picasso (pedigree), I am thinking this one prospect could help many hardworking ranchers make a better living.

 

[HerefordSire]

why the title of the thread change?

I changed the title Bammy. Originally the title was "Hereford Prospect". I soon realized I underestimated the open ended thinking of the non-scientific audience. Is this the reason, the new title, "Why Herefords are Vanishing"? I figured the scientific community would get some support. As we can see now, there are breeders that tend to not believe scientists.

 

[HerefordSire]

why the title of the thread change?

:clap:

Are you becoming neutral in regards to the possibility of high value being present in something we can't see?

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: