Schrag sale

Stop being so thin skinned everybody. My points are not about anyone in particular. I can't argue doc about certain commercial guys. But that's not the reflection of the industry as a whole. I'm not telling anyone how to do there thing.  My point is if slowly the focus could be turned to not only sell females but bulls as well. Doc with your resource situation your bulls would be a good candidate to be grouped with other bulls in a sale west of the Mississippi. Does anybody offer shorthorn bulls in volume out west? Like 100 or more?

I guess someone yanked AJs post but I'll address it anyways.  Yes semen is still available and no pedigrees ever changed.  Once again the facts aren't needed I guess.  I have paper work that says JKR Ivy League tested clean for TH.  Then when a couple TH calves showed up, the testing company told me that a "clerical" mistake was made.  Since that point we test every bull twice. 

Joshua

Sorry I missed all that. No hard feelings anyone.

-XBAR- said:

Word on the street J3, is that because of the TYPE of cattle you like, only about 20% of your cows weaned calves last year? True?

And its not about me not liking them, its about them being a threat to the commercial viability of the shorthorn breed.

Click to expand...

Hows that new shorthorn association coming along? What criteria are you going to use to be able to join?

Sorry I didn't get in on this thread earlier and it took a little to get caught up on what was going on and it actually has fit some piece together on why there have been so many sour SP brothers and sisters lately.

On to my point and before I start this is somewhat sarcastic but some truth is behind all of it. I have read this thread and understand that all of you folks have problems with in your breed.

The Shorthorn breed has endured a lot of the same major problems that the Hereford breed has tried to conquer for the last 3 decades. Both of our breed’s biggest problems are that our cattle are not BLACK. While we have been open to marketing our cattle to commercial ranches and year after year we watch them bring black bulls home and in many cases they are an inferior animal to what we produce. You think that all we have to do is market our cattle as the best cross for their black base and we have had some limited success, but we all know that when our occasional customer goes to visit the breeder wherever they buy their black bulls from they continue to sell them that black hides will fetch the most dollars. What I find that is most interesting is that a lot of breeds have changed the color of their cattle to get their customers to buy their cattle and they call them balancers or composites. I know that this is not really what this thread intended but when we start talking about the commercial cattleman you know that the majority like black.
I really had no intention of hijacking this thread and I don’t really understand all of the issues that you folks were talking about, but while you are looking at problems within your breed you’re also looking for ways to expand the market for your cattle in general.

Sorry to interup but I have sat and listened to Hereford breeders talk for hours about similar problems with our breed and question why we cannot get a better piece of the market. Problems with the showring vs. range cattle, one of the oldest arguments there is in any breed.

I just have to chime in on this one. People have different opinions and that is obvious. What I think keeps happening here is that the context of the opinions and the motives for the opinions are also different. Those from Canada cannot understand truely what we are dealing with here in the U.S. when it comes to Shorthorns. You don't use the same genetics, you may not have the same issues. So when you say that someone should not be complaining about certain genetics and how breeding choices are made in the U.S. your opinion is somewhat out of context in my opinion. Also, there is an argument that everyone should breed whatever they want and whatever is financially feasible "for them" and the market that they find themselves in. The other side to that says that the best thing for the "Shorthorn breed" is to breed cattle that can perform in commercial environments and do all of the things that cattle are suppose to do. A lot of people want to breed for Shorthorn females. They believe that is the only way to make money in the Shorthorn show cattle scene. This ongoing argument is never going to end. There will always be breeders who want to chase after pretty cattle and there will always be breeders who want to chase after performing cattle. I think the brunt of the argument comes down to who is willing to admit that there is a definite difference between the two. One side tells the other to shut up because they don't want anyone knowing how bad their cattle perform and the other side wants others to change so that the breed they choose will begin to have a better reputation within the real world. This is a problem within the U.S. and all of our jackpot, club calf, TH, PHA, big boned, and hairy calves we must have. Again, this argument will never die. <cowboy>


p.s. Breeders with perfect performing show cattle need not reply.

JTM, Ibagree the argument will never end. I like to hear other people's opinions. Until it turns into a crummy sales pitch. I said it earlier. This breed could use another 500 farms like SS. Not the same cattle for us all obviously but the good reputation and the happy customers.

(clapping) (clapping) (clapping)
Very interest topic! Starts with a light discussion regarding a determinated herd and finds with a very very good interpretation from a Hereford breeder (not Miniature suppose), some times an outside unparcial view have good value!
Understood and learn some topics today:
- On US/Canada show cattle are fake beasts but are good for sold, and real cattle are bad for sold but are real!
- Shorthorn EPD's are ALL fake and unuseful numbers only used for occupy space on sale catalogues, as breeders in general lie the real values or do a pré clean on data.
- For some people a 110 pounds calf is better than a 80 pounds calf....but on reality both ones will to be weaned and go to a feedlot and this show no meaning for me, as grain will finnish both on same time.
- Sale catalogues show BW EPD's, not the real bull BW. So a bull that born with 110 lbs and show a -1 BW EPD is preferred for one that show BW EPD of + 2 lbs, even born with 80 lbs.
- Scottish like of big animals (saw it on local), don't know how many time....maybe until Prime Minister cut off all subsidies and Scots/Brits must bred real cattle that will born, grow, work, conceive and birth on grass as real cattle.
- US and Canadian breeder are like Brazilian...each one blindly believes that your operation, in consequence your genetics are the true one.

Interest topic!
(pop)

Cabanha Santa Isabel - BR said:

(clapping) (clapping) (clapping)
Very interest topic! Starts with a light discussion regarding a determinated herd and finds with a very very good interpretation from a Hereford breeder (not Miniature suppose), some times an outside unparcial view have good value!
Understood and learn some topics today:
- On US/Canada show cattle are fake beasts but are good for sold, and real cattle are bad for sold but are real!
- Shorthorn EPD's are ALL fake and unuseful numbers only used for occupy space on sale catalogues, as breeders in general lie the real values or do a pré clean on data.
- For some people a 110 pounds calf is better than a 80 pounds calf....but on reality both ones will to be weaned and go to a feedlot and this show no meaning for me, as grain will finnish both on same time.
- Sale catalogues show BW EPD's, not the real bull BW. So a bull that born with 110 lbs and show a -1 BW EPD is preferred for one that show BW EPD of + 2 lbs, even born with 80 lbs.
- Scottish like of big animals (saw it on local), don't know how many time....maybe until Prime Minister cut off all subsidies and Scots/Brits must bred real cattle that will born, grow, work, conceive and birth on grass as real cattle.
- US and Canadian breeder are like Brazilian...each one blindly believes that your operation, in consequence your genetics are the true one.

Interest topic!
(pop)

Click to expand...

I found a new friend..  very well said...

An updated picture of the What's Up bull calf, soon to be steer- can be found on this link...  http://www.steerplanet.com/bb/the-big-show/shorthorn-bulls-and-bull-calves/

17th picture from the top, or 2nd bull calf from the bottom.  Right above the light roan stouty that so many people have PM'd me about. 

I think it is important to discuss the differences. To me its crazy that FFA instructors are teaching kids that it is fundamentally oh to raise th cattle. But every body in the beef industry rejects that premise. Veternarians reject that premise. Animal rights people reject that premise.

I thought that JKR Ivy League was tested to be a "outcast" line of th carriers. Was he ever parentally heritage dna tested? Ivy League does go back Improver in the reported pedigree.

aj said:

I thought that JKR Ivy League was tested to be a "outcast" line of th carriers. Was he ever parentally heritage dna tested? Ivy League does go back Improver in the reported pedigree.

Click to expand...

I don't know which line he tested positive for.  He was tested after the outcast mutation had been identified so both were ran when we tested him.  According to the testing company a clerical error was made when documenting testing results.  Yes he parentally verified on both sides.  Had his Dam done also. 

Joshua

j3cattleco said:

aj said:

I thought that JKR Ivy League was tested to be a "outcast" line of th carriers. Was he ever parentally heritage dna tested? Ivy League does go back Improver in the reported pedigree.

Click to expand...

I don't know which line he tested positive for.  He was tested after the outcast mutation had been identified so both were ran when we tested him.  According to the testing company a clerical error was made when documenting testing results.  Yes he parentally verified on both sides.  Had his Dam done also. 

Joshua

Click to expand...

I had the same thing happen a couple years before Joshua had this happen with Ivy League. I had a bull that some breeders in eastern Canada wanted to buy and I told them I would not sell him until he was TH tested. I sent the blood sample in and he was shown as being TH free on  the test report. I sold him to the interested party. It was a bit fortunate as they only had 1 carrier female for TH and she happened to be the second female they had that calved to this bull and she had a TH calf. If she had a normal calf we would have probably not found out about the error in the TH testing until another group of cows had been bred to him. If there is any question, I always test twice now, to hopefully eliminate the chance of human error.

I had a bull that was tested clean. He was twin. I was told that the twinning aspect of the deal could screw up results. I probablt had a th deformed calf out of him and retested him. With that information they determined that he was a th carrier. Was Ivy League tested with a clean shringe? Did a vet do it? Seems kinda funny that that you double test bulls but won't check a cow that is going to be embryo tranplanted. Hell I thought that was a ASA requirement. But I guess if if you go non Shorthorn with your new et cow no one really cares. Is that an innaccurate statement?

Was the same blood sample th tested the same sample that was used in parental dna testing?

I think it is pretty hard to pull a fast one anymore if push comes to shove with dna capability. Thats if the right vial gets pulled on the right cattle and a sample is not switched or mislabeled.

In my case, a clean syringe was used. I never use a syringe more than once for drawing blood samples. The sample was tested TH free on the first test. When the TH defective calf was reported, the same blood sample was retested, and in the second test it tested THC> The lab said the mistake was due to human error in reading and reporting the original test. I'm not sure how this could or would happen, but it did. In the end, the buyer of the bull threatened legal action against the lab, and they settled out of court with a good sized settlement amount.  I know mistakes can happen when humans are involved, however, it sure can get messy when genetic testing is involved. We got lucky in that a defect calf resulted from the second cow that calves ( the only carrier in this herd). If that had not happened, this could have gone a few years before it was found.

aj said:

I had a bull that was tested clean. He was twin. I was told that the twinning aspect of the deal could screw up results. I probablt had a th deformed calf out of him and retested him. With that information they determined that he was a th carrier. Was Ivy League tested with a clean shringe? Did a vet do it? Seems kinda funny that that you double test bulls but won't check a cow that is going to be embryo tranplanted. Hell I thought that was a ASA requirement. But I guess if if you go non Shorthorn with your new et cow no one really cares. Is that an innaccurate statement?

Click to expand...

I don't know what your problem is with this whole situation especially since you odviously have your assumptions about what happened.  Yes a vet pulled blood and yes he was parentage verified using the same sample.   The double vision cow is non registered and I'm assuming she's dirty.  If she was clean you would be bickering at us for using dirty bulls and now your bickering at me for assuming she's dirty and wanting a clean bull.  I don't get it?  I never said I wasn't going to test her either just didn't matter at all for first flush because the plan was a clean bull first.

I have nothing to hide about the Ivy league situation.  It sucked and I wouldn't wish that upon anyone but, your assumptions are flat wrong!




Joshua