Problem with Club Calf Industry...thoughts please

As much as I disagree with the showring and the club calf industry, I still find it interesting and "fun".  But I wanted to pose some questions for the SP world.  

How consistent could any of these club calf sires be?  They have every breed under the sun in them, and are the outlier or extreme of a certain calf crop.  How many bad ones are out there for every good one?  I know thats what wins shows, the most "different" one that is hard to come by but how many do you have to produce to find that outlier?  

I thought it was interesting what the description for Heatwave was on Cattle. com; "As of 2007, Heat Wave is THE bull for producing show topping steers. He’ll miss sometimes and when he misses he misses big. However, there’s no other bull out there producing more sale topping cattle than Heat Wave. Just don’t use him on heifers. "  Does that even sound like a remotely "good" bull.

Does anyone actually think that "show cattle" are the best cattle?  Or is there some concensus that the show industry is indeed an outlier and more of niche market?

Is it a good calf if he/she has to have hair, drugs, and thousands of dollars of feed and supplements added to them to be competitive?



Keep in mind that I enjoy the show industry and look to be a part of its future, I just ponder these questions a lot and would like some input.

There is a market for show cattle that have a certain look, cattle are bred for that look than pushed to an extreme, then they go to far. Over time the trends and desirable traits swing back and forth (is it any different than the pure bred breeders?) Commercial cattle have changed from short fat to giraffe tall and then towards the middle. Judges are the ones who create the trends, if they had looked for balanced functional cattle that were ideal for the market, you would see a different type of calf in the ring, they wanted that one with a little extra and that is what you have now.

As the commercial producer pursued high weaning weights they ended up with 1800 pound cows, if you pursue low birth weights over time you will end up with smaller cattle. We are never happy with balance we always seem to want more of something

As far as the club calf bull being cross bred, you can not get all the disired traits they want in the ring with just one breed.
You can put all the blame on the bull when he is bred to every cow that can walk. HW clicks with certain cow types and if bred to just that cow type I bet you get allot less trash. (Not just HW allot of the top bulls get bred to everything with out much thought, just want that home run)
How many commercial bulls that are out there are not recommended on heifers?
I think that some show cattle could do great in the real world others, no. But I have also driven by some pastures full of Commercial cattle that do not work in the real world either. No real breeding program or direction, just throw cows in pasture, throw bulls in pasture (cheapest one they can buy)check on them when you round them up the spring, load calves on truck. Do the same again next year.

If you turned out all the club cows and club bulls and left them alone for 10 years I am sure they would come to a balance, might loose allot of cows but over time the strong would survive. At least their not like Bulldogs, have to be AI'd cant breed natural, have to give a C-section because they cant birth natural. At least we have not got to that point nor do I think we will.

I would stay out of this because it’s beating a dead horse but I’m the one that wrote that Heat Wave quote so I’ll jump in.  I've used more Heat Wave semen over the past five years than any other bull by a wide, wide margin.

The idea that there is only one definition of "good" for bulls is overly simplistic, misguided, and naive.

Even in sales where they market 400 bulls from the same ranch and the same breeding, good operations split them up by what they are “good” for.  Some are good in a calving ease situation but not when you are looking for gain and carcass.  Some are good for gain but will make your replacements too big for that type of a use.  To claim that clubby bulls are supposed to produce based on some generic standard of “good” when even commercial cattlemen can’t agree on what “good” is doesn’t make sense.

Show cattle are the best cattle for what they are meant for, producing show cattle.  Even within that definition there are different definitions of what is better depending on whether your final show has hair.  The kind of bulls you see the big name mid-west guys haul to Denver are going to be very different than the kind of bulls you'll see coming from guys like Kris Black or Brandon Horn.

Regarding consistency, it’s not about producing a set of 50 steers of the same color and weight, it’s about producing one that’s better than the rest of them.  If you consider consistency to be a goal in and of itself, why waste time on an evaluation where only one calf is judged?

When you stop trying to pigeon hole everything into one standard and realize it’s okay to for a bull to be really good at just one thing, the big picture tends to become much easier to see.

I couldn't agree with Jeff more.  I can not understand why people run down different types of cattle.  Every producer needs to raise cattle they are happy with and the ones that make them money.  Just because its different doesn't make it bad or wrong. 

Joshua

the only problem is there are fewer people doing it. 

Before I got into the Club Calf deal I use to show strictly commercial angus steers at our County Fair. When a guy bought my blue ribbon steer in the auction at the fair he came up to me and said, "this is what a fat steer should look like and do not let anyone tell you different". Just thought it was an interesting perspective from someone outside of the show market.

Lots of different motivations behind show cattle from the kid showing the cattle, the parents who want their kid to win, to the producer that is looking to make a living.  Yes, it is a beauty contest, but "real world" conditions also apply.  If it can't walk it aint going to do any good in the show ring or in a commercial operation.

I think people get wrapped up in the big money $$$s and the prestige of showing, but their is also a lot of kids out there who learn to love cattle by showing. 

There is a lot of bad things that go on, but lots of great things also - just like anything.  We had some former show ring beauties that end up being great mothers and producers.

Jeff_Schroeder said:

Regarding consistency, it’s not about producing a set of 50 steers of the same color and weight, it’s about producing one that’s better than the rest of them.  If you consider consistency to be a goal in and of itself, why waste time on an evaluation where only one calf is judged?

Click to expand...

Maybe that's why I have a problem with the show (any kind of) animal industry.  Personally, I'd rather be producing 19 good ones, and one sale barner, than 19 shitters and 1 great one...

I see it as a breeding program-- but then again I guess if your whole breeding program is geared to produce 1 great one???? 

Heck, that quotes' even on our website...

That's your choice and I see nothing at all wrong with that.  Of course, if you decide to take the 19 good ones to the show ring, you'll tend to get beat by the calves coming from operations aiming for the great ones.  It's a completely different game if you are breeding for consistency, you are going to have a set of cattle that is more commercially acceptable. 

The difference between you and I is that I have no problem with you raising cattle that way.  I don't feel the need to keep reminding everyone they aren't raising cattle the way I think they should. 

There's a market and demand for numerous types and kinds of cattle.

Maybe that's why I have a problem with the show (any kind of) animal industry. 
[/quote]

here's one for you, since I'm no "bogus"....  in my breed @ L'ville-- there were 65 entries in the junior show-- 14 of them at our genetics listed as a parent, and 24 of the had something from us as a grandparent...  I realize that's not 95% of the show like Mr. Rich--- but on the other hand, how many other people can say that 1/3 of the show, at one of the biggest livestock exibitions, were their genetics-- and more importantely.. how many people on this board can say that about a national show??? 

hypocrite

  I'd like to start by saying that I have enjoyed the show cattle industry for 50 years. I like watching the trends change as they always do. Having said that, I must say that I also appreciate the commercial cattle industry as well. I guess that I have always hoped that they could impact each nother positively. Wishful thinking I guess. At this point in time, there is one aspect of the show industry that can and does have a very negative effect on commercial cattle. Soundness. In the last 2 or 3 years I am seeing more and more crippled cattle hit the local barns. In my opinion this is very negative to both segments of the industry. Do any of you see this as a problem?

olsun said:

  I'd like to start by saying that I have enjoyed the show cattle industry for 50 years. I like watching the trends change as they always do. Having said that, I must say that I also appreciate the commercial cattle industry as well. I guess that I have always hoped that they could impact each nother positively. Wishful thinking I guess. At this point in time, there is one aspect of the show industry that can and does have a very negative effect on commercial cattle. Soundness. In the last 2 or 3 years I am seeing more and more crippled cattle hit the local barns. In my opinion this is very negative to both segments of the industry. Do any of you see this as a problem?

Click to expand...

Could not agree more!  Of all the national judging contests I went to this past year, I maybe saw two or three stuctually sound steers that were truly comfortable on the move.

I certainly appreciate everyones input.  I am not trying to "pidgeon hole" the show industy, certain bulls, or a group of people at all.

I have learned many life lessons and useful skills from the show industry and evaluating livestock, but on the road the questions would continualy pop into my head.

I certainly agree that there are different bulls for different production goals, but (Heatwave and clubby cattle aside, with general cattle in mind) a single trait sire is most likely something to stay away from.  Now I may not know the standards of a "good" bull, but logicaly a sire that does one thing extremely well and everything else not so good does not sound like something you would want to use in your herd.  We search for balance in the showring, why don't we start searching for balance among our sires?  However, I am beginning to understand to end up with a good one at the end of your halter, you have to breed two different extremes together in hopes for the barn burner "outlier" that wins the shows.

I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone, just trying to further broaden my understanding here. 

Of all the national judging contests I went to this past year, I maybe saw two or three stuctually sound steers that were truly comfortable on the move.

Click to expand...

If you aren’t just using hyperbole to make a point, I’d have to question your definition of structurally sound.  If you are expecting fat steers to move around like BCS 5 cows in the pasture you are judging an apple by the standards of an orange.  It may have been different in the past but on the whole, show steers today don’t move worse than the equivalent fats in a feedlot.

Now I may not know the standards of a "good" bull, but logicaly a sire that does one thing extremely well and everything else not so good does not sound like something you would want to use in your herd

Click to expand...

Logically, if your herd is focused on that one thing, it’s “extremely” good.

frostback said:

Maybe that's why I have a problem with the show (any kind of) animal industry. 

Click to expand...

here's one for you, since I'm no "bogus"....  in my breed @ L'ville-- there were 65 entries in the junior show-- 14 of them at our genetics listed as a parent, and 24 of the had something from us as a grandparent...  I realize that's not 95% of the show like Mr. Rich--- but on the other hand, how many other people can say that 1/3 of the show, at one of the biggest livestock exibitions, were their genetics-- and more importantely.. how many people on this board can say that about a national show??? 

hypocrite
[/quote]

hypocrite?  how do you figure?  Obviously that means that our genetics are working for everyone else, to create what they consider to be good enough stock to compete at a show.  While my goal isn't to create a show winner, that doesn't really mean we don't show..  We actually do show at Louisville- it's the only show we go to.  Now, with that said, I'd much rather just stay home and sell breeding/ show stock than I would attend any show.  Now, my wife on the other hand... Well, let just say we know how women are.. They like to wear bling, fix their hair all up, and run around like they're somebody important at a show.  I dread going to shows. 

Because we were the biggest genetic influence of the show, and had probably 10 exhibitors showing stock that traced to ours... How does that effect my breeding program?  It doesn't, those parent and grandparent stock are gone, and succeeded for whoever it was that used them. 

I know one particular sire that we sold as a baby, sired a class winner at KILE, a different daughter was class winner at L'ville, and yet a different daughter was champion at Indiana State Fair, they were owned by two different people, yet were neighbors.. How does that same anything about hypocrite about my breeding program? 

I know, it's b/c I raise good ones.. It doesn't hurt that my good ones, are better than everyone else's.  They are all breeding peices, designed for one purpose.. To improve the breed and individual breeding programs. 

My 2 cents here and I dont even begin to think that people are going to agree with me.  I am a lot younger than some on here, but older than others.  Been in this industry about 21 years and I am 28 yrs old.  I always laugh a little inside when I start hearing people talk about how the Commercial Cattle and Show Ring Cattle are so far removed from one another.  Well yeah, I mean it is the SHOW ring not the Average, Run of the Mill, Middle of the Road Ring.  Do the vehicles that most of us drive to and from work or for work everyday belong in a car show, absolutely not.  The other argument is Show Cattle require so much more TLC, well yeah, they are show cattle.  Same with the cars again, dont the people who have cars in car shows put more TLC into them, than we put into the beater that we drive for work.  But just because the steer in the show ring doesnt look just like the steers in the feedlot everybody says that they are so totally different, to which I say, open your eyes, they follow pretty similarly in type and kind, the ones in the show ring just tend to have a little bit more of everything except for growth.  And if you are concerned with that then move somewhere and show in a show that has a growth contest, they are out there.
Earlier in this post someone talked about the trends we have seen in the commercial industry, we started with short pudgy cattle, then everyone got totally focused on WW and we ended up with giraffes, which led to calving issues so everyone got completely focused on BW and back to short pudgy cattle, until they finally reallized to look at the best combination of the 2 and the commercial industry finally settled on a good in the middle kind of cow.  Is this not the exact same trend we have seen in the showring, yes it may follow a year or two behind the commercial industry,but still the same trend.  What packers are looking for in feedlot cattle is typically what judges are looking for in the show ring.  Yes we may place one over the other on a style, look factor, but for me and I think a lot of other judges with steers the style and look just comes in to seperate steers that are really close as far as power and product.  A pretty one with no product will never beat an ugly one with tons of red meat if I am judging. 
And yes there are differences in the look of whats in the show ring and whats in the feedlot.  One reason that everyone seems to forget is genetic make up.  In the steer ring we are looking for animals with meat that are gonna hang a good carcass.  What breeds give us these traits? The terminal breeds(i.e. most of your European cattle) but what is their downfall, they typically dont milk as well or raise one as well as the british breeds which dont give as much product.  In the show ring industry we are pouring feed to them anyway, so we can afford to put a very high percentage of terminal genetics in those steers, but it in the commercial world they cant afford to pour the creep to em, that mama has to raise that calf, so they are gonna use almost purely british genetics so that the cow will raise the calf.  How many commercial operations do you know that are running a cow herd of anything other than british or in the south american breeds.  You want see many cow herds in the commercial world with very much european influence at all.  If a producer isnt keeping replacements then they would behoove themselves to run a terminal breed bull over those other cows, but still the british and maternal influence in the calves in the feedlot is going to keep them from being as powerful as whats in the show ring, and nothing wrong either way, the cattle in the feedlot were not produced in most cases for the show ring, and the cattle in the show ring were not intended in most cases for the feedlot.
Are the problems in the show cattle industry, absolutely, are the problems in the commercial cattle industry, yep.  One thing is I see the show cattle industry being blamed for the genetic defects, from my knowledge the only genetic defects more prevelant in show cattle that arent being eradicated only because of show cattle are TH and PHA.  Thats 2, how many other known genetic defects in cattle are out there, numerous, and most of them surfaced in the commercial type herds first.
So I guess its just my opinion and I look at things with a much simpler approach and dont try to make some complicated explanation for it all, but I really dont see all the problems and disconnect in the industry that a lot of people do.

You can't compare club calves to commercial animals because they are so different in style and purpose. Club calves were originally designed to yeild a heavier carcass on a smaller frame and have better feed conversion so they feed out faster. Therefore costing the producer less money and time.  They became show animals but that wasn't their origional purpose, or what it wad supposed to be. They never took off in the commercial industry because they were too expensive

What would be your guess as the show industry vs commercial?  I would be thinking we are talking something like .0001 if not smaller.  Think of those huge feedlots in nebraska and kansas. 

I think the worlds are closer together than people see.Iif you would shed out the show cattle and wash the feedlot cattle you would see a lot of similarities in the two groups. both groups are looking for heavy muscle, proper finish, daily gain(cost to finish), and so forth. I think the biggest difference to me is structure. I realize that a fat steer won't walk like a cow but there is no way a good portion of the club calves could survive in a two acre feed lot. they would break down and fall apart in no time.  I hear it all the time in the show ring," the two calves below this steer are far more sound but give up thickness, and I feel he is sound enough to walk to feed." To me this is false. Yes he can walk to feed with all the joint supplements, rubbing in liniment on his joints, tied to a rail the the cooler, and turned out into a 20x40 stall at night, but if you put him in a feedlot and took away all the extras and required him to walk the longer distances from food to water I don't think he could do it. I'm not saying all show cattle are crippled I have seen plenty that are sound, but until judges put more of a priority on soundness, things will remain the same. If these muscle bound cripples would be put on bottom of class for a couple years the show industry would move away from the one big thing setting them apart.  For people who think they aren't that close together all they have to do is look at some operations and run the math. I know some people who had 30 cows but put on a 50 head club calf sale and his partner had a feedlot. Either they had a hundred percent success rate with 2/3 of the herd having twins or calves were coming out of the feedlot and said to be from top club calf bulls. The other example is the old brand inspector from around here he strait up told me while checking brands at the sale barn he bought the good ones to show. For the 10 years his son showed you couldn't hardly beat him at shows.

CarleyE said:

You can't compare club calves to commercial animals because they are so different in style and purpose. Club calves were originally designed to yeild a heavier carcass on a smaller frame and have better feed conversion so they feed out faster. Therefore costing the producer less money and time.  They became show animals but that wasn't their origional purpose, or what it wad supposed to be. They never took off in the commercial industry because they were too expensive

Click to expand...

not to be rude, but this post is one of the few I've ever read that left me scratching my head... at what is the point you are trying to make...  You honestly have zero idea what you are talking about.  I've disagreed on alot of posts over the years, but almost every time, I could see where the poster was coming from- or that they could have a leg to stand on in regards to backing it up.

I don't think you know the true defintion of a 'club calf'.  (argue)