ASA Secretary
- Thread starter Dale
- Start date
Help Support Steer Planet:
Doc
Well-known member
The scary thing about this whole thing is, who is steering the ship right now? Without a Hammet or Langman in the office to oversee things while they hunt for a new Sec., how big a rush are they going to get in to just fill the spot? I don't know if they will be able to convince Sherman to come back for the interim again.
M Bar, I agree that we having been preaching to the choir too long about getting the word out there.
M Bar, I agree that we having been preaching to the choir too long about getting the word out there.
aj
Well-known member
Lets just make it a one year term. Put someone new in every year let the people bounce him or her off the walls for a year and then put in someone else. If we could just get salutes bwt epds down to mammoth...I think things would settle down.
i thiink it is too bad.mr. ruhle was very helpfull in getting my problems with my reg. fixed.iam a small nobody and he got right back to me and went out of his way.mr. bolze would never take my calls he was always out of the office on herd visits. i thought the assoc. was running great the last six months , i also liked how mr. ruhle was not political and supported all aspects of the bussiness . what happened. didnt he straighten out this boards mess from a year ago?
sjcattleco
Well-known member
Replies to other posts!!
M BAR good post but its really time to fall of the fence....
Oakview there maybe some individual showy animals that can work out commercially but as a whole they are destine to fail! If you use all the old time tools the showring winners are too big and too extreme to be efficient enough to perform in ways that a commercial cattlemen would expect. In the next few years the majority of the continental cattle will fade away in the US.. Feed costs will make them irrellavant. I think the US cow herd will look more like Argentina Angus, Hereford and Shorthorn will dominate... Murrys, Dexters, and Devons will see a jump in popularity!
Garybob the details I get out of Omaha is that Ruhle was only in the office about 60% of the time and that he got a side job selling seed! and blew a $100,000.00 per year job because coming into the office was not important enough!
aj Bulls like salute are part of the problem not the solution!
Frame 5 and masculine!! NOT Frame 6 + and look like a steer.
Tucker Ruhle was a nice guy......Don't think he was much of a cattleman...
Ron Bolze was the guy we needed Sorry he didn't take your calls but he was out working....the herd visits were his way of learning the breed! Should be a prerec for all new Secretarys..... Even if a Shorthorn Good ol boy is hired he might think he knows my herd but unless he sees it he won't have a clue!! You could tell by his comments that Ron Bolze had huge plans and was very impressed with some of the cattle he saw....
M BAR good post but its really time to fall of the fence....
Oakview there maybe some individual showy animals that can work out commercially but as a whole they are destine to fail! If you use all the old time tools the showring winners are too big and too extreme to be efficient enough to perform in ways that a commercial cattlemen would expect. In the next few years the majority of the continental cattle will fade away in the US.. Feed costs will make them irrellavant. I think the US cow herd will look more like Argentina Angus, Hereford and Shorthorn will dominate... Murrys, Dexters, and Devons will see a jump in popularity!
Garybob the details I get out of Omaha is that Ruhle was only in the office about 60% of the time and that he got a side job selling seed! and blew a $100,000.00 per year job because coming into the office was not important enough!
aj Bulls like salute are part of the problem not the solution!
Frame 5 and masculine!! NOT Frame 6 + and look like a steer.
Tucker Ruhle was a nice guy......Don't think he was much of a cattleman...
Ron Bolze was the guy we needed Sorry he didn't take your calls but he was out working....the herd visits were his way of learning the breed! Should be a prerec for all new Secretarys..... Even if a Shorthorn Good ol boy is hired he might think he knows my herd but unless he sees it he won't have a clue!! You could tell by his comments that Ron Bolze had huge plans and was very impressed with some of the cattle he saw....
i thought the asa exec. job was to manage the office and service the shorthorn breed,not travel around and not take care of the office and try to influence people to breed certain types of cattle.mr. bolze is a nice guy but left the office in a wreck.finacialy and tried to influence people with herd visits and nice coments the staff he hired was poor at best.i will take twenyy percent of mr. ruhle over all of mr. bolze anytime. the proof was in the perfermence. mr. ruhle stayed out of breed politics and respected all shorthorn breeders regardless of thier goals.
I think that it is awesome to see people passionate about the breed of cattle that they have chosen! But sometimes that passion is a lot like love. It's blind. Not realistic. As someone who has only a few shorthorns a year to sell and is not enthralled with any one breed, I think that I have a unique perspective.
In years past there was some problem with every registration or transfer we completed. it was incredibly frustrating. I can't imagine how frustrating it was to those of you who have many transactions. The last couple years have been MUCH smoother. That lets me know that those in charge identified a large problem and fixed it. That alone is a significant improvement to the association. He was a hands on kind of manager, as evidenced by the fact that he has answered the phone and helped me as several of you have already mentioned. That may not be the best type of manager in all situations, but I feel confident it was perfect for the situation that he came into.
Since he seemed like such a quality hire, I wonder if there could be another reason he left or entertained other offers. From my observations, things I have seen, it seems to me that a handful of breeders, or less that that even, have a huge influence in the association. even an influence that borders on maliciousness. Maybe he knew he was too good to be the puppet that it seems is a requirement of this particular position. And until that requirement changes, no high quality individual will take that position unless they don't have a full grasp of the reality of that requirement which will soon be learned.
MBar has made a perfect job description for the head of any breed association, not just shorthorns. Where I differ with some of you is in the qualifications one needs to lead an association. Which breed has the elite, best run, most profitable association? If I were looking to change the direction of a breed association, I think I would try to emulate the Angus association and look for things they do that factor into their success that could be done in my situation. Personally, if I had to rank breeds by my personal likes and dislikes, I would rank Angus next to last just above the Brahman. However to argue with their success is like looking in the mirror and denying that is you.
In the late 80's early 90's, the Angus breed had one foot on a banana peel and another in the grave. At that time we were big in the Simmental business and our business was thriving, the fastest growing breed in the nation. But the Angus association had something we didn't have. Their leadership was made up of primarily business men who would be more at home on Madison Ave than in rural Iowa. Our leadership was made from successful cattle men who, although very accomplished in their own field, were not at all prepared to deal with the changes the Angus association was about to bring about. Running a breed association is much more like running an advertising business, or a service industry business than running a cattle farm. It would help to be an accomplished cattleman as well, but it shouldn't be the number one factor. Boards should be as diverse as you can possibly get them. The second you think you know it all, that no one can teach you anything , like the Simmentals did, that's when your butt gets bit.
Is anyone old enough to remember the famous "elephant ads" the Angus association used heavily then? They portrayed continental breeds as the elephants while the Angus of course was the more sensible size. I remember being in Louisville the first time I saw one of those ads. The Angus bulls that were there could step over our bulls they were so big. But they focused on perception, not necessarily reality. which segways to the next point.
I am going to qualify the rest of this opinion with this statement. There has been study after study after study that shows that you cannot judge the taste or quality of a piece of beef by the color of the hide of the animal it came from. A quality piece of beef is a quality piece of beef. These "sheer test" results and "stars for tenderness are just ridiculous. There is so little difference between the tenderness of one ribeye from a choice carcass from another of the same quality carcass that it is one of the biggest wastes of money ever. The quality of the carcass is the biggest determining factor. and a quality carcass can come from most breeds and crosses and from an animal with any color hide.
Back in those days the Angus cattle didn't grow like the continental, they didn't milk with some of them, and in their own pursuit of frame size along with 10 straight years of the average Simmental birth weight dropping, they no longer had much of an advantage in birth weight. The only things they had that others didn't was their black hide and the fact that the consumer in the city probably had never even heard of another beef breed and so equated "Angus" with quality. They began the CAB program which pays premiums for carcasses that meet their requirements and the american beef industry will NEVER be the same. Hereford have tried to brand their beef as well and I am sure that it is as good. But the PERCEPTION is that it is not and so that brand has never, nor will it ever fly as the CAB program does. There will never be enough commercial cattlemen willing to leave the dollars on the table that using red or red and white bulls would require them to do. I'm not saying the breed won't grade with angus, isn't as good, whatever. It's just a dynamic that makes it impossible and unrealistic to believe that the shorthorn breed will ever be a top 5 breed. The Herefords get away with it because they have a narrow niche that requires an extremely hardy, low milk animal to work in a commercial situation.
The shorthorns that win the big "breeding type" cattle shows are way to big, in my opinion. That being said, if not for the showring, the shorthorn breed would be nothing but a footnote in what breeds of cattle used to be in the country. If Maines had not been introduced, if the number top registration bulls in the breed didn't exist, neither would the association. If kids didn't love their color and dispositions those bulls never would have become tops in registration. If those people weren't out showing those cattle there would be no exposure for others to see. A breed needs both segments. Although some people will stubbornly raise the breed they are in love with no matter their results, they always seem to me to justify it in one way or another, for me staying with a breed is about making money, period. And I promise you that if I sell my male animals as steers for $1500 at 6 months, I will make more money than you if you sell your bulls at two years for $2,000. If the cattle prices fall very far again, you won't sell as many bulls and won't register as many and your association will suffer financially. However, the demand for my calves isn't based on live cattle futures, they are sold for recreation and I will always have a demand. I will always be registering calves. It's pretty easy to throw stones at show cattle because to the purist, they aren't "real world" animals. But they still have a big contribution to make to an overall breed and in my opinion are more important to the shorthorn breed than in any other.
The only other thing I have to say is that sj, if you think that on average, british breeds can convert feed to muscle as efficiently( as measured in total dollar value which is the only real way that matters) as continental breeds do, it's like looking in that mirror and saying that's not me. It just ain't so. With new emphasis on a COMBINATION of yield and quality grade along with the needed attention to converting feed to muscle efficiently, continental X Angus cross cattle will be in even higher demand than they are today. And people who raise them for commercial cattlemen can't keep Angus X continental cross females.
I love shorthorn cattle. Of all the breed associations I have dealt with, they were they most difficult to work with. That seems to have changed and I hope that the direction of the association and its quality of service to its customers continues to climb.
In years past there was some problem with every registration or transfer we completed. it was incredibly frustrating. I can't imagine how frustrating it was to those of you who have many transactions. The last couple years have been MUCH smoother. That lets me know that those in charge identified a large problem and fixed it. That alone is a significant improvement to the association. He was a hands on kind of manager, as evidenced by the fact that he has answered the phone and helped me as several of you have already mentioned. That may not be the best type of manager in all situations, but I feel confident it was perfect for the situation that he came into.
Since he seemed like such a quality hire, I wonder if there could be another reason he left or entertained other offers. From my observations, things I have seen, it seems to me that a handful of breeders, or less that that even, have a huge influence in the association. even an influence that borders on maliciousness. Maybe he knew he was too good to be the puppet that it seems is a requirement of this particular position. And until that requirement changes, no high quality individual will take that position unless they don't have a full grasp of the reality of that requirement which will soon be learned.
MBar has made a perfect job description for the head of any breed association, not just shorthorns. Where I differ with some of you is in the qualifications one needs to lead an association. Which breed has the elite, best run, most profitable association? If I were looking to change the direction of a breed association, I think I would try to emulate the Angus association and look for things they do that factor into their success that could be done in my situation. Personally, if I had to rank breeds by my personal likes and dislikes, I would rank Angus next to last just above the Brahman. However to argue with their success is like looking in the mirror and denying that is you.
In the late 80's early 90's, the Angus breed had one foot on a banana peel and another in the grave. At that time we were big in the Simmental business and our business was thriving, the fastest growing breed in the nation. But the Angus association had something we didn't have. Their leadership was made up of primarily business men who would be more at home on Madison Ave than in rural Iowa. Our leadership was made from successful cattle men who, although very accomplished in their own field, were not at all prepared to deal with the changes the Angus association was about to bring about. Running a breed association is much more like running an advertising business, or a service industry business than running a cattle farm. It would help to be an accomplished cattleman as well, but it shouldn't be the number one factor. Boards should be as diverse as you can possibly get them. The second you think you know it all, that no one can teach you anything , like the Simmentals did, that's when your butt gets bit.
Is anyone old enough to remember the famous "elephant ads" the Angus association used heavily then? They portrayed continental breeds as the elephants while the Angus of course was the more sensible size. I remember being in Louisville the first time I saw one of those ads. The Angus bulls that were there could step over our bulls they were so big. But they focused on perception, not necessarily reality. which segways to the next point.
I am going to qualify the rest of this opinion with this statement. There has been study after study after study that shows that you cannot judge the taste or quality of a piece of beef by the color of the hide of the animal it came from. A quality piece of beef is a quality piece of beef. These "sheer test" results and "stars for tenderness are just ridiculous. There is so little difference between the tenderness of one ribeye from a choice carcass from another of the same quality carcass that it is one of the biggest wastes of money ever. The quality of the carcass is the biggest determining factor. and a quality carcass can come from most breeds and crosses and from an animal with any color hide.
Back in those days the Angus cattle didn't grow like the continental, they didn't milk with some of them, and in their own pursuit of frame size along with 10 straight years of the average Simmental birth weight dropping, they no longer had much of an advantage in birth weight. The only things they had that others didn't was their black hide and the fact that the consumer in the city probably had never even heard of another beef breed and so equated "Angus" with quality. They began the CAB program which pays premiums for carcasses that meet their requirements and the american beef industry will NEVER be the same. Hereford have tried to brand their beef as well and I am sure that it is as good. But the PERCEPTION is that it is not and so that brand has never, nor will it ever fly as the CAB program does. There will never be enough commercial cattlemen willing to leave the dollars on the table that using red or red and white bulls would require them to do. I'm not saying the breed won't grade with angus, isn't as good, whatever. It's just a dynamic that makes it impossible and unrealistic to believe that the shorthorn breed will ever be a top 5 breed. The Herefords get away with it because they have a narrow niche that requires an extremely hardy, low milk animal to work in a commercial situation.
The shorthorns that win the big "breeding type" cattle shows are way to big, in my opinion. That being said, if not for the showring, the shorthorn breed would be nothing but a footnote in what breeds of cattle used to be in the country. If Maines had not been introduced, if the number top registration bulls in the breed didn't exist, neither would the association. If kids didn't love their color and dispositions those bulls never would have become tops in registration. If those people weren't out showing those cattle there would be no exposure for others to see. A breed needs both segments. Although some people will stubbornly raise the breed they are in love with no matter their results, they always seem to me to justify it in one way or another, for me staying with a breed is about making money, period. And I promise you that if I sell my male animals as steers for $1500 at 6 months, I will make more money than you if you sell your bulls at two years for $2,000. If the cattle prices fall very far again, you won't sell as many bulls and won't register as many and your association will suffer financially. However, the demand for my calves isn't based on live cattle futures, they are sold for recreation and I will always have a demand. I will always be registering calves. It's pretty easy to throw stones at show cattle because to the purist, they aren't "real world" animals. But they still have a big contribution to make to an overall breed and in my opinion are more important to the shorthorn breed than in any other.
The only other thing I have to say is that sj, if you think that on average, british breeds can convert feed to muscle as efficiently( as measured in total dollar value which is the only real way that matters) as continental breeds do, it's like looking in that mirror and saying that's not me. It just ain't so. With new emphasis on a COMBINATION of yield and quality grade along with the needed attention to converting feed to muscle efficiently, continental X Angus cross cattle will be in even higher demand than they are today. And people who raise them for commercial cattlemen can't keep Angus X continental cross females.
I love shorthorn cattle. Of all the breed associations I have dealt with, they were they most difficult to work with. That seems to have changed and I hope that the direction of the association and its quality of service to its customers continues to climb.
the_resa86
Well-known member
I am sad to see Greg go but in the long run it may be best for the breed. I think he was a great temporary fix because he was not afraid to jump in and get his hands dirty. Heck at Junior Nationals he was going around checking in cattle with the junior board members (not just holding papers and doing nothing but actually getting dirty and checking tattoos). I think he brought more confidence in the Association because the office seems to run smoother and people knew he was going to work hard. That being said I don't know if he had the background to truly fix the breed and increase the membership but like I said he was a great temporary fix and did a good job while he was there. I wish him the best of luck.
justintime
Well-known member
Well said Gonewest! Well Said! You made some excellent points and I think your unique perspective helps clear the issue. Over the years, I have had purebred herds of 8 different breeds along with our Shorthorns. A few years ago we decided to disperse over 100 purebred Charolais cows and concentrate on producing Shorthorns. I am sure some would say I was crazy, as I could have picked any other breed to produce. I picked Shorthorns for many reasons and I have no regrets.
I live in Canada so most of my "Association connections" have been with Canadian breed associations. The exception is that I have had considerable interaction with the ASA and the people who have worked there. I will say that there were some major issues in that office when Bolze left, and I am not entirely sure what was going on. I think Greg Reuhle walked into a pretty big mess when he started the job, and I think he did a great job of turning this office around.... at least it appears that way from my perceptive. Reuhle did not do this by himslef, but he gathered some excellent people around himself and together they started to fix what needed to be fixed. The registration system was probably the biggest mess. Gwen Reynolds was hired, and this lady was a god send, as she has got the registration system running efficently. The on- line registry system has really helped as it gets the owner of the animals correctly their mistakes BEFORE they are submitted. The mistakes made by breeders on their registrations was incredible before this was introduced.
The problem with the job of running a breed association like the ASA is that it has a widely based membership with many interests. Every member has his/her own idea of what a Shorthorn should look like and how the association should be run. I do not think that the shape or size of the cattle in the breed should be job one of the association. The marketplace will dictate this. If any Shorthorn breeder can make a living raising cattle of any shape or size, then what business is it of mine or anyone else's to say they are wrong. As I have said on here many, many times, there is room in this breed for everyone. Rather than just complaining about the cattle that are shown, or promoted, raise some cattle that you think are better. The marketplace will tell you if you are right or wrong.
I am not picking on sjcattleco, as he is entitled to his opinion just as anyone else. I will say that I think he is a little firm in his opinions. He states that frame 5 masculine cattle are better than frame 6 non masculine cattle. I agree with part of that. I do think we need to make our bulls more masculine. In my world, frame 5 cattle will not cut it though. I am NOT saying he is wrong, I am just saying that he might be right for where he lives and the people he sells to. I sell most of my bulls to commercial cattlemen, and frame 5 bulls are ALWAYS the last ones left... or the ones that sell for the least $$. But that is here... not where sjcattleco lives. We may both be right.
Another point.... I will agree that we need to work on some birth weight issues. I will only use examples from my own herd as they are the ones I know the most about. I have not had a single complaint about BWs from a bull buyer since I made a decision to castrate every bull calf over 110 lb. You may say that 110 is still too high BW, and you may be right. That is where I originally set my maximum BW at. So far it is working for me. In our recent bull test, some interesting facts appears. Not one bull with a BW under 100 lb indexed 100 or more on ADG or WPDA. Not one! This indicates to me that we have to be careful what we are wishing for. I firmly believe that there are major issues between breeds in this regard.I have also use Salute in my herd.... and have had 11 calves. I have not touched one at birth... and I have not had to castrate any because they have had BWs over 110 lb. I have banded some other calves from some so-called calving ease bulls though. This BW issue is very complex. In our sale this spring, a Salute son sold for $20,000. I think every commercial man at teh sale had him circled in his sale catalog. The group that bought him is made up of purebred and commercial breeders. It is interesting that most of the purebred breeders in this syndicate, probably sell the most Shorthorn bulls to commercial men in Canada.
I thought oakview made some excellent points in his post. Some of the recent posts on here suggest that Trump will never be accepted in the commercial industry. The same was said about Dividend adn Guinness when they were imported. Time changes everything. I sold a Trump grandson to a commercial man 6 years ago. He is still using him, and this man says that this bull is the best bull he has ever used. You should see the calves he sells every fall. They are an amazing set and he has topped the market with them. This man works full time off the farm as well, so many of his cows calve by themselves. I do not think this is an isolated case. My point is you cannot lump all the cattle from any bloodline together. There will be good ones.,... and bad ones.
I live in Canada so most of my "Association connections" have been with Canadian breed associations. The exception is that I have had considerable interaction with the ASA and the people who have worked there. I will say that there were some major issues in that office when Bolze left, and I am not entirely sure what was going on. I think Greg Reuhle walked into a pretty big mess when he started the job, and I think he did a great job of turning this office around.... at least it appears that way from my perceptive. Reuhle did not do this by himslef, but he gathered some excellent people around himself and together they started to fix what needed to be fixed. The registration system was probably the biggest mess. Gwen Reynolds was hired, and this lady was a god send, as she has got the registration system running efficently. The on- line registry system has really helped as it gets the owner of the animals correctly their mistakes BEFORE they are submitted. The mistakes made by breeders on their registrations was incredible before this was introduced.
The problem with the job of running a breed association like the ASA is that it has a widely based membership with many interests. Every member has his/her own idea of what a Shorthorn should look like and how the association should be run. I do not think that the shape or size of the cattle in the breed should be job one of the association. The marketplace will dictate this. If any Shorthorn breeder can make a living raising cattle of any shape or size, then what business is it of mine or anyone else's to say they are wrong. As I have said on here many, many times, there is room in this breed for everyone. Rather than just complaining about the cattle that are shown, or promoted, raise some cattle that you think are better. The marketplace will tell you if you are right or wrong.
I am not picking on sjcattleco, as he is entitled to his opinion just as anyone else. I will say that I think he is a little firm in his opinions. He states that frame 5 masculine cattle are better than frame 6 non masculine cattle. I agree with part of that. I do think we need to make our bulls more masculine. In my world, frame 5 cattle will not cut it though. I am NOT saying he is wrong, I am just saying that he might be right for where he lives and the people he sells to. I sell most of my bulls to commercial cattlemen, and frame 5 bulls are ALWAYS the last ones left... or the ones that sell for the least $$. But that is here... not where sjcattleco lives. We may both be right.
Another point.... I will agree that we need to work on some birth weight issues. I will only use examples from my own herd as they are the ones I know the most about. I have not had a single complaint about BWs from a bull buyer since I made a decision to castrate every bull calf over 110 lb. You may say that 110 is still too high BW, and you may be right. That is where I originally set my maximum BW at. So far it is working for me. In our recent bull test, some interesting facts appears. Not one bull with a BW under 100 lb indexed 100 or more on ADG or WPDA. Not one! This indicates to me that we have to be careful what we are wishing for. I firmly believe that there are major issues between breeds in this regard.I have also use Salute in my herd.... and have had 11 calves. I have not touched one at birth... and I have not had to castrate any because they have had BWs over 110 lb. I have banded some other calves from some so-called calving ease bulls though. This BW issue is very complex. In our sale this spring, a Salute son sold for $20,000. I think every commercial man at teh sale had him circled in his sale catalog. The group that bought him is made up of purebred and commercial breeders. It is interesting that most of the purebred breeders in this syndicate, probably sell the most Shorthorn bulls to commercial men in Canada.
I thought oakview made some excellent points in his post. Some of the recent posts on here suggest that Trump will never be accepted in the commercial industry. The same was said about Dividend adn Guinness when they were imported. Time changes everything. I sold a Trump grandson to a commercial man 6 years ago. He is still using him, and this man says that this bull is the best bull he has ever used. You should see the calves he sells every fall. They are an amazing set and he has topped the market with them. This man works full time off the farm as well, so many of his cows calve by themselves. I do not think this is an isolated case. My point is you cannot lump all the cattle from any bloodline together. There will be good ones.,... and bad ones.
garybob
Well-known member
Oakbar, the problem I have with the last part of your comment is this: Without aggressive marketing, and a re-vamp of our Performance Evaluation Programs, your "laizez faire" idea won't work. The Beatles sang "Let it Be", then they broke up.oakview said:
GB
knabe
Well-known member
GONEWEST said:
2.2 pounds reduced force from 12 pounds force to cut through a steak at 0 days aging is insignificant? that's 18% and doesn't sound ridiculous. granted, the curves move together the longer the number of days hanging, but that costs energy.
it's pretty obvious that the biggest SELLABLE PREDICTABLE product out there is ranchers reserve which is basically any carcass that is aged a minimum number of days to drop below the statistically significant number of days to be tender and noticeable to tasters and the consumer. marbling is less required when what some consumers are after are a tender predictable product. this is one reason grass fed meat don't have repeat customers based on quality, but on "green" appeal. i have taken my own surveys and tried the product myself and it is pretty clear, the market is not trending towards a leaner, older carcass. yes, the product does need to be cooked at a lower temp to be cooked right, but when a customer doesn't, they blame the product. the safety zone to cook this product is less.
it's pretty clear that even different sides of a new york steak has different levels of tenderness, the big end vs the small end.
the markers are simply a first attempt. gone west, just how do you propose to improve quality in a predictable fashion? what do you propose one measures and what technology would you propose to do this in a manner that doesn't force would be changers to have 100 head, follow the carcasses, choose a couple of individuals etc. if you have a solution that is repeatable by an independent lab, i'm all ears and money.
and as for the beatles, "let it be" was a good thing as their magic was gone and this ushered in a plethora of new artists so we didn't have to listen to payola garbage from the beatles any more as they were getting stale. same thing happened to led zeppelin, aerosmith and countless other artists who signed multirecord deals. same thing happened with eddie murphy and baseball players. laizze-faire works.
aj
Well-known member
I'm with sjc most of the time.JIT...I don't know what kind of envoroment you are located in....mountains,semi-arid, on the coast or what? But here 110# bwt is just to big. Do the commercial guys up there watch the cow closely at calving. What type of grass and nutritional situation are you in? I think frame 5 cows are coming...you might want to use a terminal sire on them I don't know. Kansas is like the third or fourth largest cow-calf state in the U.S. and I'd bet you 100,000$ that 9 out of ten would laugh at a 110# bw bull. There are to many options out there. On registrations...I finally figured out the computer and I love it know. It actually helps me keep records better.I haven't met a better man than Bolz.
simtal
Well-known member
sjcattleco said:
I think your contradicting yourself, You list how continental cattle will fade away in the US, yet say shorthorn will dominate. Is that not a continental breed? I sure think so. Murrys, dexters, and devons? I doubt that. And this whole idea of continental cattle not being efficient is way off base. Depends of what efficiency you desire. Cow maintenance costs are one thing, but Feed to Gain is different.
knabe said:
knabe
Well-known member
simtal said:
If you read the latest and greatest about beef production as it pertains to cow-calf operators, the consensus of most folks is that mature cow size must be reduced.
There are numerous articles about mature cow weights and stocking rates. Percentage body weight weaned by calf will become more important for the cow calf operator to remain in the black. If you are under 55% calf weaned weight vs. mature cow weight, you are not going to be profitable per the words of some. This scenario works until you keep daughters and breed them to "trait leaders" in this type category and keep those daughters. Most of us have seen the blind nature of folks chasing single traits and this will lead to smaller cows, smaller weaning weights, smaller carcasses, smaller smaller smaller. Terminal sires (continentals for reference) will be needed to cross with these kind of cows for reasons such as hybrid vigor, larger carcasses, and higher performing females. This will take around 8 years to hit the wall. I personally believe that middle of the road is a pretty safe bet. Since we are talking about shorthorns, I will say that this breed can meet both expectations. JIT can sell larger BW bulls due to where he lives. Watch RFD TV on saturday in the spring and you will see angus bulls selling in SD and north with +5.0 BW and the bulls sell very well. Angus bulls in Kansas will be docked $100.00 for every 1/10th increase in BW EPD's over 2.5. AJ is right in that us Kansas folks drank some really powerful kool-aid in regard to light BW. Shorthorn breeders have low BW bulls that will sire females with 5 frames. Ask Scott, he's got some. Go talk to Lee and see his cows. Listen to Kit Pharo, he's got a few too (not shorties, but they are not big cows). Heck, I have two bulls right now that are small. I plan to keep those daughters and breed them ol' gals right back to Hank (TM Dazzler 54P). The daughters out of hank that I have are being bred to my two small bulls due to the size that he puts in his progeny. Them hank daughters are big. I am not sure if the're "big ol good uns, or good ol big uns". I do greatly appreciate their udders and ability to raise big calves. I can't single select for this, so we "mesh" our genetics to try to keep most of our customers happy. Some customer might have little cows and need a bull to give them a boost in production. Some producers may may have some big, hard doin' cows than need a bull to retain daughters from, see calf weight % weaned above. Some customers want a steer for the couty fair or a heifer to exibit. We are trying to keep all parties appeased and coming to our house. As for riding the fence, if I can take a bred heifer out of a pasture on a wednesday, and have a reserve division winner at a PACE show on Friday (Ozark Empire 2006), put her back to pasture on Sunday, then riding the fence is OK by me. If I can pull a bull off pasture Sept 3rd ( 220 acres, 25 pairs), and have a national champion bull in Louisville in November, then I am content with what we are doing. There will be a place for many breeds of cattle in the future, if not, we would all be doing the same thing. Since bovine basically eat what we can't farm, then it tells me that cattle in Ohio probably need to be a little different than Canada, or Colorado, or Florida. The end point is always the same (dinner table), but the means to get there is 100's of different directions.
There are numerous articles about mature cow weights and stocking rates. Percentage body weight weaned by calf will become more important for the cow calf operator to remain in the black. If you are under 55% calf weaned weight vs. mature cow weight, you are not going to be profitable per the words of some. This scenario works until you keep daughters and breed them to "trait leaders" in this type category and keep those daughters. Most of us have seen the blind nature of folks chasing single traits and this will lead to smaller cows, smaller weaning weights, smaller carcasses, smaller smaller smaller. Terminal sires (continentals for reference) will be needed to cross with these kind of cows for reasons such as hybrid vigor, larger carcasses, and higher performing females. This will take around 8 years to hit the wall. I personally believe that middle of the road is a pretty safe bet. Since we are talking about shorthorns, I will say that this breed can meet both expectations. JIT can sell larger BW bulls due to where he lives. Watch RFD TV on saturday in the spring and you will see angus bulls selling in SD and north with +5.0 BW and the bulls sell very well. Angus bulls in Kansas will be docked $100.00 for every 1/10th increase in BW EPD's over 2.5. AJ is right in that us Kansas folks drank some really powerful kool-aid in regard to light BW. Shorthorn breeders have low BW bulls that will sire females with 5 frames. Ask Scott, he's got some. Go talk to Lee and see his cows. Listen to Kit Pharo, he's got a few too (not shorties, but they are not big cows). Heck, I have two bulls right now that are small. I plan to keep those daughters and breed them ol' gals right back to Hank (TM Dazzler 54P). The daughters out of hank that I have are being bred to my two small bulls due to the size that he puts in his progeny. Them hank daughters are big. I am not sure if the're "big ol good uns, or good ol big uns". I do greatly appreciate their udders and ability to raise big calves. I can't single select for this, so we "mesh" our genetics to try to keep most of our customers happy. Some customer might have little cows and need a bull to give them a boost in production. Some producers may may have some big, hard doin' cows than need a bull to retain daughters from, see calf weight % weaned above. Some customers want a steer for the couty fair or a heifer to exibit. We are trying to keep all parties appeased and coming to our house. As for riding the fence, if I can take a bred heifer out of a pasture on a wednesday, and have a reserve division winner at a PACE show on Friday (Ozark Empire 2006), put her back to pasture on Sunday, then riding the fence is OK by me. If I can pull a bull off pasture Sept 3rd ( 220 acres, 25 pairs), and have a national champion bull in Louisville in November, then I am content with what we are doing. There will be a place for many breeds of cattle in the future, if not, we would all be doing the same thing. Since bovine basically eat what we can't farm, then it tells me that cattle in Ohio probably need to be a little different than Canada, or Colorado, or Florida. The end point is always the same (dinner table), but the means to get there is 100's of different directions.
oakbar
Well-known member
GB,
Again, someone has mistakenly identified the remarks of---- oakview--- as being those of ---oakbar. I have made no comments on this post!! No problem just another misidentification!!
Oakbar
P.S. I do think that being the Executive Secretary of any breed is a thankless job. I've always said that there are three jobs in our county I wouldn't want-- Sheriff, President of the school board(I actually was this for 5 years), and the cook at the Country Club. There's no way to win at any of them. Being Secretary of a breed organization probably trumps them all, however!!
Again, someone has mistakenly identified the remarks of---- oakview--- as being those of ---oakbar. I have made no comments on this post!! No problem just another misidentification!!
Oakbar
P.S. I do think that being the Executive Secretary of any breed is a thankless job. I've always said that there are three jobs in our county I wouldn't want-- Sheriff, President of the school board(I actually was this for 5 years), and the cook at the Country Club. There's no way to win at any of them. Being Secretary of a breed organization probably trumps them all, however!!
justintime
Well-known member
We are getting off the topic of this post .... again..... but I am just saying that we need to be very careful that we do not lose the performance in our cattle in our quest to get lower BWs. There is a big difference between Angus and Shorthorns in this regard. I know that there are Angus cattle that have 80 lb BWs that have good growth. I know there are also lots that don't. I also do question some of the Angus BWs as well. It just seems funny to me that Angus breeders near me, who report every birth weight and do it honestly are telling me that they are getting 120+ lb bull calves off of some low BW AI sires. Of course, the bull always gets blamed for BW but even if part of it is coming from the dam, it obviously is coming from somewhere. I visited an top Angus herd on my recent trip to Scotland. This herd was almost all North American Angus bloodlines. It was a very good set of cattle. The owner had one complaint, that being that he was getting too many calves that were huge at birth. He had an excellent yearling bull that I really liked. He told me he was 60 kg at birth... which using my math makes him over 130 lbs at birth. And Shorthorns are the only breed with BW issues?????
My vets tell me that they see more Angus sired C- sections than any other breed. I find this interesting, especially when they are promoted as being the no nonsense breed. Personally, I have had two vet assisted births in the last 5 years from close to 800 calvings. Both were backwards calves from heifers that could not be popped up into the birth canal. All I am saying is that there is much more to calving ease than just birth weight. I have said for years that we need to be able to identify calving ease more accurately than just using BW. If a calf is 2 inches longer than another calf at birth, it obviously will weigh more at birth. ( I am guessing 20 pounds or more). Both may have been identically easy births.
I am old enough to remember the small framed cattle from the 60s. I never want to go back there again. I agree that we need to moderate frame size but let's keep some sort of sanity here. I believe that most everything in our lives is best in moderation.... including the size of our cows. Optimum is a good trait in almost anything one can think of. If you do not remember the cattle of the 60s and 70s, I suggest you talk to an older breeder who went through this era.... and I doubt if you will find anyone who wants to go back there again. I bet many of them have spent more years than they care to remember trying to get away from these small framed poor performing toads. If that is what you want to raise, well, go right too it as you certainly are entitled to raise any kind you want too.
I think we are all wanting to see some of the same changes in our cattle. My only concern that no matter when a change is introduced, too many people take it to the extreme. Yes, I think we all are wanting more moderate, easy fleshing cattle. Let's just be VERY VERY careful that we do not go too far.... and let's not go dumping the semen from some of todays sires out too soon as we may need it to bring our cattle back to reality.
My vets tell me that they see more Angus sired C- sections than any other breed. I find this interesting, especially when they are promoted as being the no nonsense breed. Personally, I have had two vet assisted births in the last 5 years from close to 800 calvings. Both were backwards calves from heifers that could not be popped up into the birth canal. All I am saying is that there is much more to calving ease than just birth weight. I have said for years that we need to be able to identify calving ease more accurately than just using BW. If a calf is 2 inches longer than another calf at birth, it obviously will weigh more at birth. ( I am guessing 20 pounds or more). Both may have been identically easy births.
I am old enough to remember the small framed cattle from the 60s. I never want to go back there again. I agree that we need to moderate frame size but let's keep some sort of sanity here. I believe that most everything in our lives is best in moderation.... including the size of our cows. Optimum is a good trait in almost anything one can think of. If you do not remember the cattle of the 60s and 70s, I suggest you talk to an older breeder who went through this era.... and I doubt if you will find anyone who wants to go back there again. I bet many of them have spent more years than they care to remember trying to get away from these small framed poor performing toads. If that is what you want to raise, well, go right too it as you certainly are entitled to raise any kind you want too.
I think we are all wanting to see some of the same changes in our cattle. My only concern that no matter when a change is introduced, too many people take it to the extreme. Yes, I think we all are wanting more moderate, easy fleshing cattle. Let's just be VERY VERY careful that we do not go too far.... and let's not go dumping the semen from some of todays sires out too soon as we may need it to bring our cattle back to reality.
knabe
Well-known member
hey jit, calving ease has to have something to do with shoulder angle and how the legs can make a smaller presentation through the birth canal. i've been waiting on your second structure column. i know that is a pain, especially comparing animals that someone might not like, and also that cows are different, ie i have two cows, different breeding, bred to the same +1 bw pb maine bull, one was 124 lbs, slight pull, after 45min-1hour labor, the next 119 lbs, popped out in 15 minutes, she had twins last year in 30 minutes. people are starting to comment on "small head" maines. any comments.
