performance bulls

[aj]

I have always been amazed at how smug "registered cattle people" are. They seldom listen to what the industry wants. They always try and and tell the dumb bastards what they need. I personally think it will be about pounds weaned per acre....or punds weaned per exposed to bull. It will never be about 1,000 pound weaning weights......its common sense.

 

[Okotoks]

I have always been amazed at how smug "registered cattle people" are. They seldom listen to what the industry wants. They always try and and tell the dumb bastards what they need. I personally think it will be about pounds weaned per acre....or punds weaned per exposed to bull. It will never be about 1,000 pound weaning weights......its common sense.

Some of my commercial bull buyers have indicated they have a requirement for Shorthorn bulls with lots of performance. They still want to keep the heifer mates for replacement heifers. So by filling this request I am smug? I guess because these commercial producers have a different vision or requirement to what you say they want I shouldn't listen to them. I don't know who the "dumb bastards" are. If a purebred breeder doesn't listen to his customers he won't sell many bulls. I assume you have a pretty big demand for your bulls AJ.

 

[librarian]

Well, I realize I am light years behind the many accomplished breeders who have spend decades breeding to a purpose.
Someone gave me a collection of Shoshone Seedstock Catalog supplements from the 1980's.  These are notes Leonhardt prefaced his sale catalogs with educating his customers about where he was going and why.  So this immersion has instigated me to question some ideas about crossbreeding and terminal matings. 
Probably the term "complementary sire " is wrong.  What I am asking about is a"compatible sire".  Angus and Shorthorn are compatible breeds because they share some genetic material and some strains have been bred to similar purposes in similar environments. Both have a wide range of types bred for different purposes, some of which are compatible and some not.  If there is a growing beef production sector utilising 1200 lb Angus cows to wean 600 lb calves on grass, then mating to a compatible Shorthorn bred to produce 1200 lb (or even 1300) cows to wean 600 (or 650 lb) lb calves on grass, then that would be a compatible Shorthorn sire to cross on the Angus cows.  The mating would be terminal because all the offspring would be destined to go to market at a higher weaning weight than the average of either parent herd.  The increase in weaning weight would be the effect of heterosis on growth, not the product of mating to a high growth bull with traits antagonistic to the perpetuation of his genetics.
Thanks XBAR, I will check in about who may be breeding to this purpose.
I know some ask their cows to produce 60% of their body weight in weaned calf, but I have not found this to work so far. 
The post about Pericles points out where the grass fed terminal outcross might come from if Shorthorn breeders don't step up.  OR we could use a bull like that on low input Shorthorn cows and leave Angus out of the equation.

 

[r.n.reed]

Excellent posts Librarian and I agree that there is great opportunity for the right kind of Shorthorn for the type of operation you mentioned.I would take the Shorthorn 1 step further back in the production chain and make a crossbred female to build a herd on.Unless these guys are selling seedstock as well they are leaving money on the table by using a straightbred,linebred cowherd.I like the term compatible for building the cow herd and complimentary for producing the terminal animal.
Another thought that crossed my mind reading these posts is that whether it is a herd consistently producing 600 lb weaning weights from 1200 cows or 900lb calves from 1800lb cows we need to remember it is a system that produces these results and genetics is just a part of that system.You need to evaluate whether or not certain genetics will work in your production system.

 

[librarian]

I have to admit to saving the F1 females to do just as you suggest.  I am interesting in the use of compatible mating between breeds because it seems that if the sire is comparable in functional traits and frame size to the females then the resulting heifers could be used as replacements that breed true to purpose if not genotypic purity.
These heifers are out of my HHFS Amos bull and some 1400 lb commercial Angus cows.  They are bred to a small frame Angus bull of Wye/OCC/Shoshone breeding. (Beral x Emblazon x Eros). The third cross would be back to Shorthorn, maybe Amos again or CCL6th.  I have been looking at the 4508 bull since he seems the right kind and ties in with CCL6th, but I don't know how big he is or how big his dam is.  Maybe there is a 4508 son that would be just right?
And yes, it all comes back to environment.  This another whole subject about epigenetics and  bioregional breeding; the selection pressures of how animals interact with forage quantity and quality, climate, soil, elevation and all the other factors that are limiting when there is no protein supplementation.

 

[librarian]

Another picture of the heifers with a Devon bull.

 

[r.n.reed]

I think these would be compatible,they are yearling bred heifers by 4508 and Frontline that I just brought home from summer pasture.

 

[librarian]

Yes.  Who sired the roan? I have a 3 year old that is very similar that made a very nice heifer calf for me with Amos.  The reds are the type that seem to be working best with this environment.

 

[librarian]

This is an Amos bull calf that was just weaned at 5 1/2 months at 500 lbs.  I wanted to leave him on the cow for a couple more months, but the customer did not want to be patient.  These genetics and those of your red heifers seem to be going the same direction.  Thanks for posting the picture.

 

[RyanChandler]

Well, I realize I am light years behind the many accomplished breeders who have spend decades breeding to a purpose.
Someone gave me a collection of Shoshone Seedstock Catalog supplements from the 1980's.  These are notes Leonhardt prefaced his sale catalogs with educating his customers about where he was going and why.  So this immersion has instigated me to question some ideas about crossbreeding and terminal matings. 
Probably the term "complementary sire " is wrong.  What I am asking about is a"compatible sire".  Angus and Shorthorn are compatible breeds because they share some genetic material and some strains have been bred to similar purposes in similar environments. Both have a wide range of types bred for different purposes, some of which are compatible and some not.  If there is a growing beef production sector utilising 1200 lb Angus cows to wean 600 lb calves on grass, then mating to a compatible Shorthorn bred to produce 1200 lb (or even 1300) cows to wean 600 (or 650 lb) lb calves on grass, then that would be a compatible Shorthorn sire to cross on the Angus cows.  The mating would be terminal because all the offspring would be destined to go to market at a higher weaning weight than the average of either parent herd.  The increase in weaning weight would be the effect of heterosis on growth, not the product of mating to a high growth bull with traits antagonistic to the perpetuation of his genetics.
Thanks XBAR, I will check in about who may be breeding to this purpose.
I know some ask their cows to produce 60% of their body weight in weaned calf, but I have not found this to work so far. 
The post about Pericles points out where the grass fed terminal outcross might come from if Shorthorn breeders don't step up.  OR we could use a bull like that on low input Shorthorn cows and leave Angus out of the equation.

First off, the fact that you have a defined breeding purpose puts you in an elitist category.  Many breeders direction is only defined by monetary reward.

I would like to question a few of your conclusions though.  I would contend that ALL BREEDS are compatible because ALL BREEDS share some genetic material and some strains have been bred to similar purposes in similar environments. ALL BREEDS have a wide range of types bred for different purposes, some of which are compatible and some not. 

One of my favorite quotes - and I say it at least 3 or 4 times every time I'm around my grandpa:  "There's as much variation within the breeds as there are between the breeds." 

Just because all the offspring of a bull are going to go to a feedlot doesn't necessarily make the bull a "terminal" bull.  Terminal denotes a particular phenotype; one that forbids/compromises maternal function. 

Do not try to re invent the wheel.  The F1 can not be re replicated.  Hybrid vigor is maximized at the third cross.  Breed those F1s to a bull of a third breed and you will reap the maximums of the biological phenomenon.  This is the entire philosophy behind my disdain for crossbred bulls.  It is impossible to create an F1 with a crossbred.  From that point, using a crossbred bull you are already behind the 8 ball.  Without an F1, you can't attain the 3 way cross. 

 

[librarian]

Yes, but I don't necessarily think I'm right about any of this.  I just like to ask questions.
Those black heifers are all from the same cow family, the only Angus family I save from because they do so well, year in and year out, on this grass on this hill on this farm.  I try to think local.  Crossing these related animals that have been selected for functionality with a bull chosen for consistently transmitting moderate frame size, hardy constitution, increased depth, good disposition etc seems, to me, to be an attempt at improving performance under these conditions through recombination.  Selection for the adaptive combinations is the breeders task.
Here is a 3 way cross from the same cow family a half sister out of a half sister of one of the black heifers.
All you say is true.