jason
Well-known member
I thought I would beat someone to the punch. Is it deleted? No...I would say it went into seclusion.
First and foremost, I appreciate the discussion. The problem with rumors is well there rumors, unsubstantiated information that could be proved true or false. The problem is if they are false, you can't go back an undo the damages caused. SP has a pretty good following, even though we haven't seen participation go up as much, the amount of visitors have nearly doubled every year (37k unique visitors the last 30 days). Lots of lurkers out there that intently read every topic.
If someone provides a documented firsthand proof, I have no problem with them posting and the discussion thereafter. I went through the aforementioned thread and was unable to see where there was any burden of proof and in my estimation it would not be prudent to keep the thread active. I will be reiterate, the thread has not been deleted, but it has been moved where it is not publicly accessible.
*************UPDATED*************
Statement from ASA regarding the rumor.
"The American Shorthorn Association (ASA) takes allegations of genetic defects or birth abnormalities very seriously, working with industry experts to research, diagnose, and develop testing procedures if deemed necessary. To our knowledge, there has never been a case of "Mulefoot" reported to the ASA, nor are there any known carriers in the ASA herd book. We strongly urge that accusations of genetic defects be based on science, not rumor. Several cases of anomalies at birth have been reported to the ASA in recent years, later to be diagnosed as nutritional deficiencies or other developmental problems. Breeders are reminded that countless things can go wrong in the fetal development process due to nutrition, environment, genetics, or any combination thereof. The ASA asks that all breeders report any anomalies at birth directly to the ASA and promises to diligently research and report on any suspect cases it receives in a timely manner."
First and foremost, I appreciate the discussion. The problem with rumors is well there rumors, unsubstantiated information that could be proved true or false. The problem is if they are false, you can't go back an undo the damages caused. SP has a pretty good following, even though we haven't seen participation go up as much, the amount of visitors have nearly doubled every year (37k unique visitors the last 30 days). Lots of lurkers out there that intently read every topic.
If someone provides a documented firsthand proof, I have no problem with them posting and the discussion thereafter. I went through the aforementioned thread and was unable to see where there was any burden of proof and in my estimation it would not be prudent to keep the thread active. I will be reiterate, the thread has not been deleted, but it has been moved where it is not publicly accessible.
*************UPDATED*************
Statement from ASA regarding the rumor.
"The American Shorthorn Association (ASA) takes allegations of genetic defects or birth abnormalities very seriously, working with industry experts to research, diagnose, and develop testing procedures if deemed necessary. To our knowledge, there has never been a case of "Mulefoot" reported to the ASA, nor are there any known carriers in the ASA herd book. We strongly urge that accusations of genetic defects be based on science, not rumor. Several cases of anomalies at birth have been reported to the ASA in recent years, later to be diagnosed as nutritional deficiencies or other developmental problems. Breeders are reminded that countless things can go wrong in the fetal development process due to nutrition, environment, genetics, or any combination thereof. The ASA asks that all breeders report any anomalies at birth directly to the ASA and promises to diligently research and report on any suspect cases it receives in a timely manner."
) from a person expressing their displeasure with my comments. Had a 30 minute convo w/ somone who never would identify themself. The anonymous caller held the position that JPJ absolutely wasn't a mulefoot carrier (how they would already know conclusively, I don't know). They went on to agree that while many heifers can't calve a 90lb calf unassisted, one shouldn't expect 90+ lb bw calf out of "their" ( He used the subjective pronoun "we" multiply times) 90+lb bw JPJ sons... ??? Again, how one could conclude that, I don't know. In the end, he stood behind the ASA and their proclamation that according to their epds, they are "heifer safe". (Apparently the ASA has some parimeters as far as what they consider "heifer safe.") 
