Belt Buckle Cattle

[RyanChandler]

Nice cow-


It's unfortunate what the scotch infusion did to the overall quality of these types.

Besides her udder, what's wrong with her?

Not a thing.  I meant it's unfortunate that her type was bred out of existence and replaced by puds. 

 

[r.n.reed]

Jazzy the dam of JPJ is deceased.She weighed 1850lbs when we shipped her.I have a daughter pictured below by 4508 that will calve this spring to our Double Brute bull.Also have a couple embryo's in the tank of the same mating.I sent blood in about 3 weeks ago so I should have DS results back soon on this heifer.

Do you have many cows that weigh 1850, or was she larger than average?

Beebe,Most of my mature cow herd would have weighed in the 1300 to 1600lb range with a few on both sides of that range.There was some variation in genetic combinations, pieces of the puzzle you might say that would account for most of the variation.I have attached a picture of one that was  about avg in size.
I only mentioned Jazzy's weight to make the point that that line of cattle is considered too small and poor performing by many and yet the mama cow although hog fat weighed 1850.What does a cow from a'' high performing line'' weigh?Do people know what their cows weigh?Do people know what it costs to maintain that cow in breeding condition?
For the record I am not a proponent of belt buckle cattle, they disgust me and are a permanent memorial to the follow the fad at all cost mentality of so called purebred breeders since 1845.

 

[justintime]

This may be slightly off topic, but in some ways it has some merit. I just read a report a couple days ago, which stated that the average carcass weight for fat cattle slaughtered in the US in the 3rd week of November, broke an all time record high at 902 lbs. I was a bit shocked that 902 lbs was the average carcass weight of all cattle killed that week. To me that was very high. This report then made another comment that made me think. It said that every increase in carcass weight of 1 lb per animal was equivalent to another 10,000 head being slaughtered. Is this how the industry is trying to make up for low cattle numbers?
I am not a big believer in belt  buckle cattle, but am a big believer in optimum sized cattle. I believe we can have easy fleshing ability and feed efficiency without having to minimize mature size. I have mentioned this before, but in 2010 I had a wonderful opportunity to visit for a couple hours with Donald McGillvary who owned the famous Calrossie herd in Scotland. Donald was a true beef leader in the 40s, 50s, and 60s and many of his accomplishments are truly incredible yet today. I asked Mr McGillvary if he knew if there were any Shorthorns left in Scotland that traced to the genetics of that era, and his reply almost floored me. He said " I sure to Hell hope there are none left. Those cattle are the reason the Shorthorn breed was placed on the list of endangered breeds in the UK". He went on to say that while he was very successful with these cattle, he and most other breeders of that day, had completely taken their eyes off the needs of the entire beef industry, and were actually just following fads and this finally almost destroyed the breed in Britain. Interesting thoughts from a true cattleman.

 

[librarian]

r.n., your average cow looks like a model of reproductive efficiency. What is her name?
She reminds me of a cow pictured in that Shorthorn World I have been studying, "the first 20,000 lb cow". This cow seems so much more Bonsma like than the heavier dual purpose ones, but she is super milky. A puzzle, like you say. Sorry I can't extract just the picture.
http://books.google.com/books?id=cR45AQAAMAAJ&dq=dual%20purpose%20Shorthorn&pg=RA7-PA16#v=onepage&q=dual%20purpose%20Shorthorn&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=cR45AQAAMAAJ&dq=dual%20purpose%20Shorthorn&pg=RA7-PA16#v=onepage&q=dual%20purpose%20Shorthorn&f=false

JIT  your remarks are right on target about this post. My question was why did we get away from the good cows in favor of the opposite.  The answer seems to be fashion, the nemesis of function. Why didn't they just return to the dual purpose genetics to recover frame instead of bringing in Maine?
Do you remember a bull, Dividend's Red Devil, 3715188 ? He is on the bottom side of Jakes Prince of Jazz 236P?

 

[librarian]

About the nice heads on those old dual purpose cattle. I think this cow of mine has the same refined head, minus the horns. Her dam was out of Sudden Impact
She wouldn't weigh 1300 lbs on her best day. Just showing pictures for fun.

 

[ROMAX]

This may be slightly off topic, but in some ways it has some merit. I just read a report a couple days ago, which stated that the average carcass weight for fat cattle slaughtered in the US in the 3rd week of November, broke an all time record high at 902 lbs. I was a bit shocked that 902 lbs was the average carcass weight of all cattle killed that week. To me that was very high. This report then made another comment that made me think. It said that every increase in carcass weight of 1 lb per animal was equivalent to another 10,000 head being slaughtered. Is this how the industry is trying to make up for low cattle numbers?Does this mean the GIRAFFES of the '70s and '80s will be the new fad(god help us all)

I am not a big believer in belt  buckle cattle, but am a big believer in optimum sized cattle. I believe we can have easy fleshing ability and feed efficiency without having to minimize mature size. I have mentioned this before, but in 2010 I had a wonderful opportunity to visit for a couple hours with Donald McGillvary who owned the famous Calrossie herd in Scotland. Donald was a true beef leader in the 40s, 50s, and 60s and many of his accomplishments are truly incredible yet today. I asked Mr McGillvary if he knew if there were any Shorthorns left in Scotland that traced to the genetics of that era, and his reply almost floored me. He said " I sure to Hell hope there are none left. Those cattle are the reason the Shorthorn breed was placed on the list of endangered breeds in the UK". He went on to say that while he was very successful with these cattle, he and most other breeders of that day, had completely taken their eyes off the needs of the entire beef industry, and were actually just following fads and this finally almost destroyed the breed in Britain. Interesting thoughts from a true cattleman.

 

[Cabanha Santa Isabel - BR]

I had a different view for dwarf Shorthorn....

 

[RyanChandler]

I only mentioned Jazzy's weight to make the point that that line of cattle is considered too small and poor performing by many and yet the mama cow although hog fat weighed 1850.What does a cow from a'' high performing line'' weigh?

I don't know that Jazzy is too small but seeing as how 1850lbs would be a generous avg mature JPJ son weight, who do we attribute the lower performance of the JPJ line to? Proud Leader?  Being only 7/8ths herself, how much of Jazzy's individual performance is the result of expressed heterosis? how much of her individual performance can we expect to be transmitted and then expressed in the following generations? Could her offsprings reduced performance (when bred purebred) be the result of breed regression?

Don't get me wrong, I've used JPJ sons and their daughters are likely my best performers... BUT I have marginal pastures at best where the heaviest weaning calf (in my avatar) weaned an actual ww of 660-- adjusted ~640.    If someone is using a bull with much less performance than Vanguard yet still experiencing similar weaning weights out of their calves, I think it can be said with certainty that their environment is much more conducive to higher weaning weights, thus they are leaving money on the table, via the opportunity cost of not using a bull with more performance. 

 

[RyanChandler]

I would disagree. I don't see how marbling and fleshing ability are antagonistic.

What are the 2 highest marbling breeds you're aware of?

How would you describe their fleshing ability?

/

Which breed is known to have the most backfat?

How would you describe their marbling ability?

 

[PDJ]

XBAR, that calf surprised me too since the roan had been culled from a commercial herd for low growth. Maybe the commercial Angus genetics behind her got dealt out or maybe it's just heterosis. She was bred to my Shorthorn bull, Amos, who is probably too moderate . Another commercial Angus from the roans herd (1350 lb cow) weaned a 702 lb calf out of Amos and another one 658. Those were actual weights.
Must be the cross. But I have been questioning the grass gurus push to convert to 1100 lb cows. I tried a Lowline cow and the calves flat out would not grow, even cross bred. They hung at 350 lbs at 18 months.

I often wonder about the "optimal" cow size debate.  I believe that nature gives us some clues.  Whitetail deer seem to adapt body size to their environment.  If you see a mature buck in Texas, it is very possible that he is only 120 pounds.  Meanwhile 300 pounds isn't uncommon in Saskatchewan.  I truly believe we need to pick optimum size for the individual environments we are targeting.

 

[r.n.reed]

I only mentioned Jazzy's weight to make the point that that line of cattle is considered too small and poor performing by many and yet the mama cow although hog fat weighed 1850.What does a cow from a'' high performing line'' weigh?

I don't know that Jazzy is too small but seeing as how 1850lbs would be a generous avg mature JPJ son weight, who do we attribute the lower performance of the JPJ line to? Proud Leader?  Being only 7/8ths herself, how much of Jazzy's individual performance is the result of expressed heterosis? how much of her individual performance can we expect to be transmitted and then expressed in the following generations? Could her offsprings reduced performance (when bred purebred) be the result of breed regression?

Don't get me wrong, I've used JPJ sons and their daughters are likely my best performers... BUT I have marginal pastures at best where the heaviest weaning calf (in my avatar) weaned an actual ww of 660-- adjusted ~640.    If someone is using a bull with much less performance than Vanguard yet still experiencing similar weaning weights out of their calves, I think it can be said with certainty that their environment is much more conducive to higher weaning weights, thus they are leaving money on the table, via the opportunity cost of not using a bull with more performance. 

You bring up some good points or questions XBAR on Jazzy and her genetic contributions to the type that JPJ is producing.At least everything that is being presented publicly sure looks the part.Kind of the same phenomenon as Rodeo Drive  who also had quite a diverse pedigree.If we had the benefit of experiencing the cattle in the pedigree in our own herds we might be able to see where the influences came from.Case in point the cow I have pictured on the previous page looks like a typical daughter of my Nelco Mcleod bull that I used in the early 80's.He  appears once on each side of her pedigree 4 generations back with 3 total outcross bulls in between.
There are so many variables that come into play on weaning weight and as you and PDF stated what works in one environment may fail in another.It takes looking at the big picture of your herd to make sure what you gaining in one area is not costing in another.

 

[librarian]

I thought the idea was to optimize performance in a given environment, not maximize the cows short term production by using a bull that is not genetically adapted for the available resources.

About marbling, isn't it more about maturity than anything else? Different breeds mature at different rates and store fat in different ways. I would say Shorthorns generally store their fat in milk and that is how they raise fat calves, even in marginal environments. How they maintain their own condition while doing that  indicates whether  they can put fat into milk and still more fat on their sides ... Or into marbling if reproduction is taken out of the equation?

A photo of the two highest marbling breeds I know of and their cross bred result below. Fleshing ability seems present, without grain or high energy forage...
(angus bull is NOT Remitall Choice Mint, he is Wye x OCC x Shoshone)

 

[aj]

x bar......not sure about the breed deal......I  think the wygu and longhorn and branvieh are marbling breeds. Some of these don't really fit this countries production methods. I think if you take.....say a Angus herd...the high marbling lines follow the easier keeping lines. If the longhorns ability to marble is there secret to success.......as far as suriving on a sawdust and sand diet is concerned.....THAT would be interesting. I think out here range cow conditions change.....they can be thin when they wean a calf.....then if they are run on cornstalks......get some corn....they gain back....maybe even store up some energy as "back fat". Its a yo yo situation.

 

[oakview]

Perhaps the source was the old MARC data, but I recall that Jerseys were among the highest marbling breeds at one time.  I would not classify them as "easy keeping", but perhaps there is a correlation between marbling ability and milkfat (butterfat).

 

[RyanChandler]

Jersey and wagyu are highest I know of. Both very hard doing.

 

[Cabanha Santa Isabel - BR]

To me marbling is correlated with size. Of course some breeds are able to marble more than another ones....british > continental > zebu.

Smal framed animals reach the maturity earlier than bigger ones. The animal requeiments and tissue deposits are follow on order....mantenance -> muscle -> fat cover -> marbling fat....small animals reach these steps early than bigger ones.....take a 9 framed Aberdeen and a small 4 framed one....with ration an food in abundance both will marble, but smaller animal first than bigger....now put both on a low food availability offer....smaller will to be fat and maybe marble well, the high framed will never to be fat enough and maybe calving twice on three years or more!

Here on grassland country, white Charolais or high percentage ones are not asked by abatoir as they not show fat cover, same that with high live weights.....

 

[oakview]

35-40 years ago the ASA sponsored what was called a sire test.  Breeders from across the country supplied a ranch, I believe in Wyoming, but cannot remember the name of it, with 50 units of semen on each bull.  It might have been Padlock Ranch.  Anyway, the western herd ran a large group of closely related black white face females.  There were usually at least 20 bulls entered in the test.  The resulting steer calves were sent to a feedlot in western Nebraska, near Brule, I think.  The cattle were measured for weaning weight, ADG, and sent to slaughter with all carcass data recorded.  As you can imagine, during the mid to late 70's, the Shorthorn bulls tested were an extremely diverse group.  There was everything from very conventional type bulls to the largest framed dual purpose type available.  I entered a dual purpose, double registered bull, Justamere Todd.  He had won the beef shows at the Iowa and Minnesota State Fair, was senior champion at the International in Chicago, and reserve senior champion at Denver.  He was a very large framed bull, weighing a very comfortable 2,500 pounds plus at maturity.  As I remember the data from the carcass portion of the test, the larger framed, dual purpose type bulls were equally as high if not higher than the more conventional, smaller framed type bulls when measuring marbling ability of their calves in the test.  The more conventional type calves had more external backfat, though.  I toured the feedlot about two weeks before the cattle were slaughtered, and you could definitely tell a difference in the frame size of the cattle.  Again, though, some of the larger framed cattle with certain genetics had more marbling and, at least in the case of my bull, were well above average in ribeye area along with above average ability to grade choice.  I believe that selection pressure over the years, within and without a breed population, plays a more significant role in marbling abiiity than just frame score.  Perhaps some of the larger framed cattle, though, were selected more for their growth, performance, and frame size than marbling.  In my opinion, you can have large cattle that marble and small ones that don't.  The trick is to not only select for the perfect one, but produce it.  What makes it fun is that your perfect one is most likely different than mine. 

 

[aj]

Great post's. Oakview.......interesting about the dual purpose shorthorns. I know the HUBS herd out of Norton Ks had some milkers that marbled. Steve Washburn is still there.....Virgil has passed. ANYWAY.....................I don't know the milkers history very well.......but I doubt the early settlers.........selected for marbling.........on purpose anyway. Thats why I wonder if marbling is tied to.........just surviving.........somehow. Longevity I guess. I still........stubbornly......think......through natural selection.........marbling and back fat(fleshing ability) COULD be tied together. steerplanet grin.

 

[beebe]

At what frame score do cattle become belt buckle cattle?

 

[aj]

I would say frame 3......maybe low 4......where do the genetically dwarf cattle bang in at?