Canadian cattle

[3 Eagles shorthorns]

Is it just me or do most of the Canadian cattle look much thicker and deeper Gutted ?

 

[librarian]

There is this explanation, which I call the Bonanza Rule
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergmann%27s_rule
Or the short version 
http://www.naturalnavigator.com/news/2012/11/bergmanns-rule-latitude-allens-mammals/

 

[Bradenh]

Yes, genetics play a large role but it's nothing compared to the difference in climate

Atleast that's how I see it as a Texan who runs a showbarn for an operation with strictly canadian cattle

 

[coyote]

Yes, genetics play a large role but it's nothing compared to the difference in climate

If you bring a gutless animal to Canada from the USA , capacity will not magically appear. You will still have a gutless wonder.

 

[Bradenh]

I don't think the post was referencing extreme scenarios but infact the nutrition difference and climate would promote more intake and better hair therefore creating a deeper stouter look on the animal

 

[librarian]

My thought is that if you want your animals to be thicker and deeper gutted, then the stout Canadian genetics will get you there. Staying there is another thing.
There are many generations of environmental selection on people and cattle that have resulted in the ability to persevere thru the long winters in northern latitudes. An animal that doesn't store fat and have a big furnace may survive, but reproduction is the goal in life.
Blizzards got Shorthorns replaced by Herefords in most places. Except the big bodied Canadian type.
If they melt when they go South its probably because they must reduce their volume relative to surface area to dissipate heat. The Northern type is cylindrical to retain heat and increase digestive capacity. I often wish Bonsma had lived in Canada and written more about the Digestive body type.

 

[RyanChandler]

Is it just me or do most of the Canadian cattle look much thicker and deeper Gutted ?

Depends what Canadian cattle you're talking about.  To me, the type of Canadian shorthorns that I consider to be 'thicker' aren't the same ones that are deeper gutted. 

 

[librarian]

What is an example of deep gutted? I'm not sure what it means. I figured it was the opposite of pinch gutted.

 

[3 Eagles shorthorns]

A lot of bulls up there look like this!

 

[RyanChandler]

What is an example of deep gutted? I'm not sure what it means. I figured it was the opposite of pinch gutted.

Reasonable enough but you'll generally hear "pinched" referencing more to the heart area than the gut or barrel.  And these aren't always mutually exclusive.  An animal can be tight/pinch hearted and still be deep gutted.  Likewise, an animal could have a nice smooth transition from shoulder to rib but then be terribly tight gutted. 

Bonanza is a bull I would consider to be very deep gutted, but not especially thick. In fact, I would consider him to be lighter muscled bull that has tremendous internal capacity.

Birdtail Gus is a bull I would consider to be very thick, but tighter or more tubular in terms of his internal capacity/gut.

 

[coyote]

I got thinking about deep gutted cattle in warmer climates, does this type survive in Texas Xbar or do they create too much heat in their furnace?

I have been looking at pictures of Australian Shorthorns , you sure don't see too many deep gutted cows down there.

 

[Cabanha Santa Isabel - BR]

Canadian Shorthorn is better than American Shorthorn.

 

[Bradenh]

You must not have sat in the front row of agribition vs Fort Worth. I've been lucky enough to do so

It's not even close. Every canadian breed in my eyes has value and most are more phenotype  ideal to me besides the charolais (with the exception of the top top end) and shorthorns. And it's a vast difference a country mile wide between canadian shorthotms and u.s shorthorns

 

[RyanChandler]

I got thinking about deep gutted cattle in warmer climates, does this type survive in Texas Xbar or do they create too much heat in their furnace?

I have been looking at pictures of Australian Shorthorns , you sure don't see too many deep gutted cows down there.

I don't think the correlation is between phenotype and climate but rather between size and climate.  I would say that the nutritional quality of the available forage in certain areas has played the most significant role in the evolution of phenotypes. Cattle that evolve in areas where the forage is abundant yet nutritionally poor, regardless of the regional temperatures, tend to be bigger barreled and shorter statured.  I think this adaptation was one of necessity that allows them to compensate for the lack of forage quality by physically being able to consume tremendous quantity.  Conversely, cattle that evolve in environments where the forage quality is high aren't as dependent on having to consume excess quantity. Because of the higher forage quality, the nutritional requirements of the cattle can be met with a relatively modest level of intake. 

As far as the Australian shorthorns, I don't think the cattle we see promoted are even remotely acclimated to their environment.  Tall, course muscled, and flat sided aren't traits I've come to associate with thriving cattle in an arid, low forage quality environment. 

 

[librarian]

I read this stuff from long ago by some guy who was kind of laughed at in his day.
His theme was that oxygen cleanses the blood and makes tissue, beef in this instance, healthy. He said cattle that exerted themselves out foraging, especially in hills, developed larger lungs and organs to pump their blood around so they were big barreled and muscular as a consequence. The most efficient oxygen processors would be short headed with wide nostrils. He said confined feeding atrophied muscle and produced fat- a non nutritious tissue in its place . He also said concentrated food made cattle flat sided.
I believe the fresh mountain air type he was describing were the THICK ones. So if you put a thick bull on a deep gutted cow, I bet you have a pretty ideal beef animal for the North Country. They sent a lot of animals of this sort to Argentina in the early 1900's. What do they look like now?

 

[librarian]

I think this is helping me understand something ( probably obvious) about beef production.
My bull has Canadian influence thru Remitall and Rothney, but Midwestern dual Columbus type as well. But the Remitall stuff does not seem to be the product of deep Canadian environmental selection, just some cattle that were brought to Canada and put into production?
From this conversation, I would say my bull is deep gutted, but not that thick. Thick being thick muscles covering his frame. He is short, frame 3.
So, in grass fed, when we prioritize capacity, we may be ignoring the basic ingredient of muscle.
This is probably why the Rito derived Angus genetics work well for terminal grass crosses.
What Shorthorn bloodlines hit these targets together, gut and muscle, without exceeding frame 5?
Another question is, if his sire, Remitall Choice Mint, had been put onto a cow family with more muscle than milk bred in, what would the result have been? He is great at adding volume to cows, but not so much meat on the steers. This is probably the reason dressing % is around 50-55%.

 

[oakview]

I think it is a little dangerous and probably a little inaccurate to classify US cattle as shallow bodied and Canadian cattle as deep.  Most of us breed cattle that fit into three categories:  they're the type we like, they are what fits into our environment, and they are what we can market most profitably.  If you think the Canadian cattle you see have more depth, then they are most likely a product of breeders that tend to focus on that trait.  There are US bred cattle with all the depth in the world and it is due to the factors listed previously.  (genetics fit into all three factors)  If you cross a Sutherland Prospector cow on Acadia Napoleon 66th, you're going to get a deep bodied calf.  Likewise, if you cross a Clark daughter with Ayatollah, you're going to get a shallower bodied calf, no matter where it is.  Available feed can make a difference if you take an animal out of one environment and put them in another.  For example, my Canadian bull, Diamond Zulu 3Z (which I am most happy with, by the way).  I have no personal knowledge of the kind of management program he came from.  He seemed to be the type I like and I thought he would add some things I needed to make my cattle more desirable (profitable).  I did not know if he or his offspring would work in my environment, though.  I had a good idea he would be okay by observing how similarly bred cattle had performed.  My observations so far:  he is one of the best Canadian bulls I know of at siring the "type" I like, they are the kind that should be very marketable here, and he seems to be adjusting to the environment (or my management techniques).  It did take him some time to recuperate from the long process of getting him to central Iowa.  I have noticed that he much prefers grassy type hay to alfalfa.  Alfalfa grows well here so we have a lot of it.  I just try to make sure he has a bale with more grass in it.  He is also the most aggressive eater I've seen in a long time. 

 

[Medium Rare]

I got thinking about deep gutted cattle in warmer climates, does this type survive in Texas Xbar or do they create too much heat in their furnace?

I have been looking at pictures of Australian Shorthorns , you sure don't see too many deep gutted cows down there.

I don't think the correlation is between phenotype and climate but rather between size and climate.  I would say that the nutritional quality of the available forage in certain areas has played the most significant role in the evolution of phenotypes. Cattle that evolve in areas where the forage is abundant yet nutritionally poor, regardless of the regional temperatures, tend to be bigger barreled and shorter statured.  I think this adaptation was one of necessity that allows them to compensate for the lack of forage quality by physically being able to consume tremendous quantity.  Conversely, cattle that evolve in environments where the forage quality is high aren't as dependent on having to consume excess quantity. Because of the higher forage quality, the nutritional requirements of the cattle can be met with a relatively modest level of intake. 

As far as the Australian shorthorns, I don't think the cattle we see promoted are even remotely acclimated to their environment.  Tall, course muscled, and flat sided aren't traits I've come to associate with thriving cattle in an arid, low forage quality environment.

I tend to agree. I consider our fescue to be something that needs to be consumed in fairly high quantities without much travel, where as some other forages are much more nutrient dense but scattered out. My cows may take a dozen bites without taking a single step where a Southwestern brush cow might take 5 bites in 10 steps. I don't believe I've ever fed a bale of alfalfa to a cow in my life, they're expected to consume grass year round which leads to an intake based on quantity over quality in order to take advantage of a cheap hay supply. I stumbled into a young Bonanza son out of a proven fescue cow that I think will produce the kind of cows that should succeed on our 90% fescue hills. It doesn't matter if they're black, red, or white, tighter gutted cattle have always seemed to find their way to the cull pen here. I've always just assumed it was partially due to their smaller rumen, narrow muzzle, and my refusing to cater to them.

I don't understand many of the Australian cattle, but I've never been there to soak in the environment they're from. I'm left assuming what grass they do find in the arid regions must be fairly nutrient dense.... or I simply have no clue what they're consuming.

What Oakview alludes to is probably more common than most would admit. Breeding what we want to look at can easily manipulate a herd to where it no longer phenotypically appears as local conditions would dictate. Early weaning, a silage pile, and a mixer wagon has changed a lot of herds in a hurry as well.

 

[oakview]

Simply put, we either adjust our cattle to our conditions or our conditions to our cattle.  Our herd is what I would consider to be practically managed for our area.  Alfalfa grows well, far out produces grass, so we use it.  I do like a little orchard grass or brome mixed in.  I know of several breeders that promote their herd as calving ease that do not feed ANY alfalfa prior to calving.  More than one have told me you can add up to 30 pounds to birth weight  with alfalfa.  We do bale quite a bit of grass hay from poorer ground and utilize corn stalks from time to time.

 

[Medium Rare]

Simply put, we either adjust our cattle to our conditions or our conditions to our cattle.  Our herd is what I would consider to be practically managed for our area.  Alfalfa grows well, far out produces grass, so we use it.  I do like a little orchard grass or brome mixed in.  I know of several breeders that promote their herd as calving ease that do not feed ANY alfalfa prior to calving.  More than one have told me you can add up to 30 pounds to birth weight  with alfalfa.  We do bale quite a bit of grass hay from poorer ground and utilize corn stalks from time to time.

I think your "poorer ground" is probably my "better ground". These clay hills weren't very blessed by the glaciers. I'd love to be able to graze your levels of corn stalk residue!