New Herdsire

[mark tenenbaum]

Those two "Durham Reds"? are very impressive-I don't see a hole in them, I can"t for the life of me figure why this cross hasn't become more prevalent-they are a cut above many of the Shorthorn females I see in photos. O0

 

[knabe]

they look like red amerifax with a little less milk

 

[mbigelow]

I think this bull will be better than his sire. He appears to have more muscle.  I really like the udders on those daughters of his.  If you get him collected this fall let me know I think I will be breeding a few cows to him.

 

[librarian]

Not that this would happen... But we could do a collective experiment using this bull in every commercially oriented Shorthorn influenced herd, then compare performance across environments, management scenarios and maternal breed.
Then do the same with those daughters, after sorting, using another bull to tweak things whatever direction and on and on. Not sure how related the bulls should be.  In 5-7 generations we would have an actual population with genetic identity.  If pan-conformity is the goal.

 

[huntaway]

No that this would happen... But we could do a collective experiment using this bull in every commercially oriented Shorthorn influenced herd, then compare performance across environments, management scenarios and maternal breed.
Then do the same with those daughters, after sorting, using another bull to tweak things whatever direction and on and on. Not sure how related they should be.  In 5-7 generations we would have an actual population with genetic identity.  If pan-conformity is the goal.

A number of sheep breeders have used this approach here for many years where from within the group they select a small number of sires that will be used over all the studs to improve linkages and improve the accuracy of any data collected. http://www.wrig.co.nz/

 

[GM]

I like the bull; awesome photo and two killer productive daughters!  But we are falling in love with pictures of mature shorthorn bulls similar to how we used to fall in love with shorthorn pedigrees.  Data, consistency, and great marketing will win.  We have got a long way to go.

I've probably never quoted AJ, but I remember the time he said, "I don't see a problem with people drinking scotch and making love to old pedigrees.....but,..."  It made me laugh...and continues to make me laugh.

 

[knabe]

A number of sheep breeders have used this approach here for many years where from within the group they select a small number of sires that will be used over all the studs to improve linkages and improve the accuracy of any data collected. http://www.wrig.co.nz/

awesome idea.  maine's had sort of an idea like this that if a group of people entered bulls in a show, each entrant would get a share of the bull and supposedly people would use that bull.  not near as well thought out obviously.


i think the first and maybe only bull for that type of contest was Nage Wide Track 94J.

 

[JTM]

Not that this would happen... But we could do a collective experiment using this bull in every commercially oriented Shorthorn influenced herd, then compare performance across environments, management scenarios and maternal breed.
Then do the same with those daughters, after sorting, using another bull to tweak things whatever direction and on and on. Not sure how related the bulls should be.  In 5-7 generations we would have an actual population with genetic identity.  If pan-conformity is the goal.

This is already happening. The American Shorthorn Association is working with the University of Illinois to start a "herd bull test". Contact the ASA if you want to have a bull considered for this study. They will be AI'ing many Shorthorn bulls in a test commercial herd and collecting all of the performance, ultrasound, and carcass data from all of the calves. I believe the bulls have to be approved by the ASA and I've heard there is an entry fee of like $2,000 or something. Then you have to give them a bunch of your bulls semen. Sounds like one heck of a deal for somebody... I'm thinking maybe they should approach breeders who have entered a lot of data on their bulls and pay them to give semen for the study or discount their dues...

 

[Medium Rare]

This is already happening. The American Shorthorn Association is working with the University of Illinois to start a "herd bull test". Contact the ASA if you want to have a bull considered for this study. They will be AI'ing many Shorthorn bulls in a test commercial herd and collecting all of the performance, ultrasound, and carcass data from all of the calves. I believe the bulls have to be approved by the ASA and I've heard there is an entry fee of like $2,000 or something. Then you have to give them a bunch of your bulls semen. Sounds like one heck of a deal for somebody... I'm thinking maybe they should approach breeders who have entered a lot of data on their bulls and pay them to give semen for the study or discount their dues...

For anyone interested.

https://shorthorn.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Application-Sire-Test_06082016-2.pdf

 

[RyanChandler]

What a joke.  The breeder should supply the semen but the other cost should be funded entirely by the association.  This is the type of stuff that our WHR dues should be paying for. 

 

[Endless Meadows]

This is starting to get a little off the original topic but while we are on it.  I think it is good to have the sire test started and hopefully it will get going within the breed.  Before I get too critical, it is the first year and there is plenty of room to grow and adapt.  Not everything can be perfect from the start.

On the down side it is fairly cost prohibitive, unless I misread something.  $2000 to AI 20 cows.  At 65% conception rate =13 calves.  Even assuming 100% survivability and not putting a value on the semen,  you would have $153.85 into each calf.  You own nothing and get premiums for nothing but you do get data back.  I understand that data is important and can be extremely valuable, but can the cost be justified? 

 

[trevorgreycattleco]

No the cost can't be justified. Name one thing the Asa does to help its members? Nothing. I want to register my cattle, but not when it costs me money to do it and I get no benefit. It's time for the Asa to step up. Long past time actually.

 

[knabe]

why can't one or more just assemble a set of animals, retain ownership and get the data or contract with the feeder to collect the data.


wouldn't that be cheaper?

 

[JTM]

why can't one or more just assemble a set of animals, retain ownership and get the data or contract with the feeder to collect the data.


wouldn't that be cheaper?

This is already happening also and the ASA has helped us do just that. We are about to get kill data on 26 shorthorn and shorthorn plus steers. We also ultrasound all of our yearling heifers and bulls. I am not completely happy with the feeding of my animals at the feedlot trial and I am considering other options.

 

[oakview]

Unless you've been around a while, you may not know the ASA had a sire test over 30 years ago.  I sent about 50 units of semen on my bull.  I believe the cows were owned by Padlock Ranch, perhaps in Wyoming.  The owners of the bull bought the steer calves at weaning and they were sent to a feedlot near Brule, Nebraska.  We took a trip to the feedlot and were able to view all the calves.  It was quite interesting, the sire groups included straight dual purpose, straight beef, and a mix of the two.  We were provided all performance and carcass data.  I know I've got the information somewhere and there were perhaps 20 or more bulls compared.  I don't know what ever happened to the data from the ASA's standpoint.  Shorthorns were also compared with numerous other breeds, up one side and down the other, at the USDA's meat animal research center about that time, perhaps a little later.  Shorthorns compared very, very favorably with the other breeds in all facets of production, conception to carcass.  My neighbor that had 100+ Hereford cows asked his field man why he shouldn't just turn a Shorthorn bull out with all his cows after seeing the data from MARC.  The field man didn't have an answer.  I don't know if this information was ever utilized to he fullest.  I support the "new" sire test, I may even enter a bull next year. 

On the down side, though, I've been told we're in the "Information Age" for over 40 years.  We've got to have this, we've got to provide that, etc.  We ultrasound our bulls and provide performance data at the beef expo and still the ones that sell highest are the "pretty ones."  I'm not saying it's right, but the largest single source of bulls in our area is still the special cattle sale at the sale barn.  Very little if any information is provided.  Selling prices at the most recent sale were from 1,500 to about 3,000.  The only common thread among the bulls is they're almost 100% black.  As long as the black hided myth is perpetuated, black bulls are what's going to be most in demand.  I don't know how many cattle men I've talked to admit they are missing something, but it's hard to argue when they think their calves are going to bring 15 cents a pound more at weaning, simply because they're black.  We can provide all the proof we want, but until that changes, it's going to be hard to get a significant commercial market share.  I hear things are a little different in Canada.  I hope so.

 

[Duncraggan]

This is starting to get a little off the original topic but while we are on it.  I think it is good to have the sire test started and hopefully it will get going within the breed.  Before I get too critical, it is the first year and there is plenty of room to grow and adapt.  Not everything can be perfect from the start.

On the down side it is fairly cost prohibitive, unless I misread something.  $2000 to AI 20 cows.  At 65% conception rate =13 calves.  Even assuming 100% survivability and not putting a value on the semen,  you would have $153.85 into each calf.  You own nothing and get premiums for nothing but you do get data back.  I understand that data is important and can be extremely valuable, but can the cost be justified?

Considering we are in the information and technology age, this is what you are buying. If I remember correctly, one animal actual kill data is the equivalent of seven animals scan data. I don't know what it costs you to scan an animal but it may pay you to do the math on this!

 

[Duncraggan]

No the cost can't be justified. Name one thing the Asa does to help its members? Nothing. I want to register my cattle, but not when it costs me money to do it and I get no benefit. It's time for the Asa to step up. Long past time actually.

This sire test is something that the ASA is doing to help it's members. Unfortunately in this day and age, the 'user pays' principle is the norm and if you want information, you have to cough up for it!
You can spend years doing your own in-herd testing, or, you can pay your $2000 dollars and fast track your data collection and accuracy by joining the ASA sire test.
With beef prices declining, and inputs soaring, I think the days of buying a cheap bull with no data at the sale barn and still making a good profit are few.

 

[JTM]

No the cost can't be justified. Name one thing the Asa does to help its members? Nothing. I want to register my cattle, but not when it costs me money to do it and I get no benefit. It's time for the Asa to step up. Long past time actually.

This sire test is something that the ASA is doing to help it's members. Unfortunately in this day and age, the 'user pays' principle is the norm and if you want information, you have to cough up for it!
You can spend years doing your own in-herd testing, or, you can pay your $2000 dollars and fast track your data collection and accuracy by joining the ASA sire test.
With beef prices declining, and inputs soaring, I think the days of buying a cheap bull with no data at the sale barn and still making a good profit are few.

I've been submitted lots and lots of data for several years. Much more data than this study will give me. 13 calves in a group for over $2,000 cost? Who can afford that in the real world? I didn't even know anything about it until a few weeks ago and it's already at the deadline. The thought crossed my mind that I should put CF Star Bucks in there just for kicks and giggles. I sent an email to the participants saying that I think we should have had a committee to talk about which bulls would be best to objectively enter this test and have the ASA pay for the expense of the testing or do some fundraising for it. I also copied ASA staff. I have received zero replies...

 

[Doc]

I've been submitted lots and lots of data for several years. Much more data than this study will give me. 13 calves in a group for over $2,000 cost? Who can afford that in the real world? I didn't even know anything about it until a few weeks ago and it's already at the deadline. The thought crossed my mind that I should put CF Star Bucks in there just for kicks and giggles. I sent an email to the participants saying that I think we should have had a committee to talk about which bulls would be best to objectively enter this test and have the ASA pay for the expense of the testing or do some fundraising for it. I also copied ASA staff. I have received zero replies...
[/quote]

Josh, I agree about knowing about it. I'm even further behind than you, I didn't find out about it until yesterday when I got my Shorthorn Insider email. It makes you wonder if they already had their bulls in place? Why wasn't it one of the headlines when you go to the ASA website instead of the BIF conference and some Jr stuff?
I'm with Lonnie in that I remember when Shorthorns were always at the top at MARC, but even then it seemed like the ASA preached the data to the choir more than getting out and preaching it to the masses.
The black hide deal is still real in our area. We use a Angus bull as cleanup on our heifers and then we put our black recips with one of our Shorthorn bulls after an egg has been put in and those black calves will always bring more than their contemporaries that are roan or red even if they are not any better.

 

[justintime]

  I don't know how many cattle men I've talked to admit they are missing something, but it's hard to argue when they think their calves are going to bring 15 cents a pound more at weaning, simply because they're black.  We can provide all the proof we want, but until that changes, it's going to be hard to get a significant commercial market share.  I hear things are a little different in Canada.  I hope so.
[/quote]


Here in Canada, there are still areas that preferences for black hides, but where I live in Western Canada, it is more based on quality of the animal than on color. I find that here, the black hided preference is influenced more  by the cattle buyers than it is by the feedlots who place the orders. If you have a set of buyers on a market, that are fairly open minded on quality rather than just color, you will see the price differences disappear. In this day and age, I have no idea why the beef industry is still based on something as insignificant as color. I know that part of this is due to the CAB program, but we also have the CAB program in Canada.
I just sold a few odds and end cattle on June 29th. Two were off age heifers born from recips that did not keep their embryo last year. One heifer was red and one was black. They were born in late May and have been on grass since early May this spring. The red heifer weighed 885 and sold for $1.46/ lb for a gross sale of $1292.10. The black heifer weighed 840 and sold for $137.50 for a gross of $1155.00. The black heifer was 3 days younger than the red heifer. Both were sired by a Shorthorn clean up bull and the black heifer was out of a Simmental/Angus dam and the red heifer was out of a Shorthorn dam. I considered both heifers to be of similar quality, yet there was a difference of $137.00 between the two heifers. ( these prices probably sound high to most reading this, but remember the Canadian dollar is 25-28% lower than the American dollar)
I also sold 3 older cows that were used as recips for several years here. One was black and weighed 1690. She sold for $.9150/ lb and grossed $1546.35. This black cow was 13 years old. I also sold 2 red Shorthorn cows. They sold together and averaged 1622 lbs and they brought $94.50 for an average gross of $1532.80.One of these cows was 17 years old and the other one was 12 years old. These cows were hog fat, and had not seen any grain since they had their first calves, and I thought they sold very well.
On another note, I just did a bit of an analysis on our bull sales this spring. We sold 29 bulls for an average price of $5325. Of these, 28 bulls sold to commercial producers , and most of them were going to be used on black cows. One bull sold to a purebred producer. The roan bulls that sold to commercial producers averaged $6272.00. The red bulls sold to commercial producers averaged $4333. We did not have any white bulls last year, but I am sure if we had some, they would have been in the top end of the sale prices. We sold 3 white open heifers in our sale and they averaged $5416, with 2 of them selling to commercial producers that planned to breed them to Angus bulls.
In some ways, we are almost seeing the reverse of what is happening in the US. In our herd, color adds value. I will take all the roans and whites I can, but we also raise lots of red bulls and heifers as there are still lots wanting them as well.