Why more bone?

simba · Aug 7, 2012

I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just really curious: Why is everyone (and by everyone I mean most people) in the club calf industry so infatuated with big boned cattle? I come from a Hereford background and I don't think I've ever heard a judge in a Hereford or multi breed class say that an animal lost a class or was placed down because they needed more bone. I agree that an animal needs to be able to carry themselves, I've just noticed that on a lot of pictures that people post on SP, many people say they would like to add more bone. Or people are looking for bulls that will add bone to their calves. I've always really liked those nice feminine females, but now many of the heifers that I see are bred for beautiful front ends, smooth shoulders and massive legs. In my opinion although they are great animals, they look really unproportionate. Like I said, I'm not trying to start an argument or point fingers, I'm just wondering: Why more bone?

knabe · Aug 7, 2012

cause cankles look so sexy. the human eye and brain is tuned to rate more as better and can't decide when enough is enough.

lfarms · Aug 7, 2012

Larissa said:
I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just really curious: Why is everyone (and by everyone I mean most people) in the club calf industry so infatuated with big boned cattle? I come from a Hereford background and I don't think I've ever heard a judge in a Hereford or multi breed class say that an animal lost a class or was placed down because they needed more bone. I agree that an animal needs to be able to carry themselves, I've just noticed that on a lot of pictures that people post on SP, many people say they would like to add more bone. Or people are looking for bulls that will add bone to their calves. I've always really liked those nice feminine females, but now many of the heifers that I see are bred for beautiful front ends, smooth shoulders and massive legs. In my opinion although they are great animals, they look really unproportionate. Like I said, I'm not trying to start an argument or point fingers, I'm just wondering: Why more bone?

thats the way we like it!

GoWyo · Aug 7, 2012

I don't know either. Seems to be it negatively impacts the carcass yield. Who wants a 20 oz. t-bone with 10 oz. of bone? Other than that, it looks cool for show cattle but is like big mudder tires on a pickup that never goes off road.

bcosu · Aug 8, 2012

Studies have shown that the amount of bone accounts for less than a percent of the change in dressing percentage.

anyways, bone adds to eye appeal and helps balance them up. it can be taken too far, a la some of the fit jobs of the lautner bulls from a couple years ago (they have toned it down since) but it is really just an aesthetic trait. it can possibly relate back to a quality of ruggedness, although many times they also become coarse jointed with all that bone...

Telos · Aug 8, 2012

I agree with cbcfarms. IMO, it's mostly an aesthetic issue. Big hairy legs are visually appealing an helps in creating more total mass. The thicker, more rounded bone is where you run into more structural issues. It appears you get more flex with a flatter made bone. JMO.

Gargan · Aug 8, 2012

This is just my opinion, but i would think a stronger foundation (more bone mass) is essential to being able to carry more muscle mass. If you would lay 300lb of feed on a 1" thick pine board, it would probably break, but if u would lay it on a 2" thick pine board, it would hold it.

leanbeef · Aug 8, 2012

Each of these posts have valid points in relation to the question asked. Substance of bone related to foot size & shape is a function of soundness, so from a productivity standpoint, adequate bone should be preferred over light bone. I like the comment that sometimes we don't when enough is enough...too much bone is obviously related to round joints which are not an indication of structural soundness and longevity, and extreme bone can also lead to calving difficulty. Jist like most of the peices of a beef animal, there is an optimum range somewhere in between the extremes, and most of us like to push everything we can to the upper limit of the optimum range. Since stoutness sells and is appreciated by most people who evaluate cattle, we want as much bone as possible without causing problems. Many of us just can't see that train coming until the wreck happens.

AAOK · Aug 8, 2012

leanbeef said:
Each of these posts have valid points in relation to the question asked. Substance of bone related to foot size & shape is a function of soundness, so from a productivity standpoint, adequate bone should be preferred over light bone. I like the comment that sometimes we don't when enough is enough...too much bone is obviously related to round joints which are not an indication of structural soundness and longevity, and extreme bone can also lead to calving difficulty. Jist like most of the peices of a beef animal, there is an optimum range somewhere in between the extremes, and most of us like to push everything we can to the upper limit of the optimum range. Since stoutness sells and is appreciated by most people who evaluate cattle, we want as much bone as possible without causing problems. [size=10pt][size=10pt]Many of us just can't see that train coming until the wreck happens. [/size] [/size] [size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][size=10pt][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]

You nailed it!

chambero · Aug 8, 2012

Every judge I've seen the last 2-3 years has been moving toward balance whether its steers or heifers.

There are plenty of cattle that are way too fine boned - particularly British breed catte - particularly Angus, which is what I bet the original poster heard the judge comment about. Lack of enough bone is just an early indicator on young calves that they won't have enough muscle, that they aren't masculine/feminine enough, etc. I got to quite a few steer and heifer shows and frankly it is pretty rare to find an animal - steer or heifer - that is way over the top on too much bone. I've never seen a fine-boned calf that had adquate muscle in the end.

You'll run across babies that look to be "freaks" as far as bone goes from time to time. Everyone I've been able to follow as they've gotten older are usually the ones that blow out structurally at a young age. Those calves usually don't get big enough either.

Overall, I don't think there is a common problem of too much bone in show cattle.

justintime · Aug 8, 2012

chambero said:
Every judge I've seen the last 2-3 years has been moving toward balance whether its steers or heifers.

There are plenty of cattle that are way too fine boned - particularly British breed catte - particularly Angus, which is what I bet the original poster heard the judge comment about. Lack of enough bone is just an early indicator on young calves that they won't have enough muscle, that they aren't masculine/feminine enough, etc. I got to quite a few steer and heifer shows and frankly it is pretty rare to find an animal - steer or heifer - that is way over the top on too much bone. I've never seen a fine-boned calf that had adquate muscle in the end.

You'll run across babies that look to be "freaks" as far as bone goes from time to time. Everyone I've been able to follow as they've gotten older are usually the ones that blow out structurally at a young age. Those calves usually don't get big enough either.

Overall, I don't think there is a common problem of too much bone in show cattle.

I agree that some of these show cattle, especially in the clubby world have too much bone ( there is a difference between the amount of bone and the amount of hair an animal has on its legs! Some animals appear to have tremendous bone, but actually most of it is hair). Like I have commented before on here, I believe every trait is best in optimum amounts, including bone. Too much bone can lead to calving problems if it is too excessive. Like muscling, you can't just muscle to one area of the body very well. Selection for rib eye area will lead to animals with more muscling in all areas of their body. Selection of animals with more bone in their legs will also lead to animals with more bone throughout their skeleton. There is also a difference in the shape of the bone, and this can be a significant factor. When I was young, I used to hear breeders talk about certain animals having great flat bone and this was a very desired trait. I'm not sure what this was based on exactly. I have noticed in myt herd, that finer boned cows never seem to produce calves that rise to the top of my calf crops. I also have found the finer boned females tend to go to town at younger ages. I have no scientific data on this but this is what I have noticed.

I have a bull customer who is a very well respected cattleman who always wants to be able to grab a bulls tail just above it's twist. He will not buy a bull if his fingers overlap a little when he does this. He says they will not be hardy enough to handle his conditions. I suppose this would depend on the size of your hands, but this guy firmly believes this to be an important factor in his bull selection. I have seen him run bulls behind a gate or into a corner of a pen so he can grab it's tail and he decides if he is still interested in this bull or not. I remember my grandfather doing the same thing as he would always put his hand around a bulls tail if he found one he liked at a show or sale. I was too young to ask enough questions to find out more about this, but the bull buyer I mentioned firmly believes this is a significant sign of an animal's doing ablity and fleshing ability.

tcf · Aug 8, 2012

Bone is stoutness and substance. It balances cattle, adds power and is not just a 'look' thing but necessary to evaluate the durability of any type of livestock. It is extremely uncommon to find a big footed frail boned one and vise verse, big boned and small footed. I am not saying it does not happen it is just not the norm. IMO bone and stoutness should always be evaluated when judging, and not just in steers or clubby bred cattle. You cant eat bone but you sure as hell cant finish a deer legged steer to an acceptable carcass weight either (in terms of Canadian industry). I have not seen many finished, frail 1450lbs steers.
Another altogether different argument is acceptable vs non acceptale bone and that is strictly personal opinion. I love big boned cattle that have that extra stoutness at the ground and foot, that's just me. When I judge I comment on bone and foot quite often. I do not consider myself to be on the extreme but every bull I look to purchase or breed has that little extra foot/ bone.
I admit bone is cool but lets flip the coin, will frail ever be attractive?

BadgerFan · Aug 8, 2012

chambero said:
I've never seen a fine-boned calf that had adquate muscle in the end.

Old school Limousins.

but, yes, perfect case for everything in moderation/optimum/ideal/etc.

leanbeef · Aug 8, 2012

I would challenge the notion that muscle and bone are correlated. Heavy boned doesn't automatically mean more muscle. Fine boned doesn't translate to light muscled. Muscle and bone are two separate traits, and i've seen light boned cattle with plenty of muscle. Particular breeds come to mind, which I won't mention at the risk of seeming biased. Looking at the flip side, I've seen plenty of heavy boned cattle with less than average muscling.

When we talk about overall stoutness, I think we're talking about the combination of muscle, volume AND bone. We can specify one area or another and say, "He's stouter boned" or "She's stouter featured" meaning overall structure, but when I call one stouter overall, I'm probably talking about a combination of traits. And yes...any breeder who appreciates performance and soundness and productivity and end product should appreciate these traits as well as overall stoutness. I think we also have to respect the fact that there are ideals and limits to these areas, and some of us forget that.

My livestock judging coach taught us to look at the circumference of the tail as an indication of heaviness of bone. It was always particularly obvious in evaluating hogs, but I think it applies to other species. I think in both muscle AND bone, we need to consider not only how much an animal has, but also more about the kind they have. I think there as many differences and as many things to pay attention to in terms of
bone and joint shape as it is to pay attention to the amount of bone.

GONEWEST · Aug 8, 2012

leanbeef said:
I would challenge the notion that muscle and bone are correlated. Heavy boned doesn't automatically mean more muscle. Fine boned doesn't translate to light muscled. Muscle and bone are two separate traits, and i've seen light boned cattle with plenty of muscle. Particular breeds come to mind, which I won't mention at the risk of seeming biased. Looking at the flip side, I've seen plenty of heavy boned cattle with less than average muscling.

I would challenge your challenge. There are certainly heavy muscled Angus bulls with finer bone. I am sure there are a few animals in what ever breed you want to bring up that are heavy boned and light muscled, or the other way around. But IN GENERAL what Chambero said exactly how it is. I would agree with those that mentioned that large boned animals are often not flat jointed and that causes long term or even near term issues.

Large boned calves are almost always the ones that cause calving difficulty. But besides the obvious longevity factor there is another practical reason to have as large a boned animal as possible in a commercial setting. Animals that are large boned will almost always outweigh their contemporaries. We don't sell smooth joints or structural correctness or anything else at the sale barn. We sell POUNDS, and to some extent color and now age/source verification. Animals in the same contemporary group with larger bone will ALMOST always out weigh and out gain those that are not as heavy boned. So they make more money. Bone weighs pounds. Its like a bucket of nails vs a bucket of feathers. That's another reason these midget cows aren't as efficient as some try to say. IN GENERAL they can't give birth to calves that are big enough or heavy enough boned to grow and weigh.

chambero · Aug 8, 2012

Point taken on Limi's. Another reason the word never should never be used.

Freddy · Aug 8, 2012

What I have noticed on some of these black cattle that needs changed some how is hind legs are to straight ,no flex ,and to small feet ...When they pull all that black leg hair up it make those back feet way out of portion and balance ....IMO

The Charolais catttle or crosses have gained popularity because of the extra bone ,flex ,and solid foundation that there on.....They have there problems also but gives you some more options to use ....

knabe · Aug 8, 2012

elephants lack muscle.

Showkid48 · Aug 8, 2012

I think y'all may be missing the point, then again I could be wrong. To me, it would seem like big bone in market cattle would be a desirable characteristic from a carcass standpoint. It's really simple, the more surface area of bone, the more surface area of meat. Think about it, which are you gonna be able to get more meat on, a scronny roping calf or a big boned show calf?

knabe · Aug 8, 2012

Showkid48 said:
I think y'all may be missing the point, then again I could be wrong. To me, it would seem like big bone in market cattle would be a desirable characteristic from a carcass standpoint. It's really simple, the more surface area of bone, the more surface area of meat. Think about it, which are you gonna be able to get more meat on, a scronny roping calf or a big boned show calf?

please provide evidence. you've provided two extremes. please provide bone to meat ratio's.

Why more bone?

Help Support Steer Planet:

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member