New JPJ son

Help Support Steer Planet:

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
Altitude,longitude, air quality, all seem to affect the shorthorn bwt's. Too much nutrition is also a problem for the shorthorn bwt's. The way you hold your mouth also affects bwt's. The trumps, rodeo drives......and all of the popular showring cattle have big bwt's. Judges are trained to pic these cattle. No one changes type or cattle. I am waiting for someone to invent a cooler type low gravity room to sell to Shorthorn breeders to weigh their calves in in order to get them under 100#'s. We won't change our cattle. We are stuck in a rut with a bunch of "me too" breeders who all use the same genetics. I think the lower yearling epd cattle will come into favor. It may take another 10 years. But people are figuring out that a plus 100 yearling epd angus bull is not optimum. Same with a plus 40 shorthorn bull. |There will be optimum (sustainable) performance levels figured. I always get a kick out of us shorthorn breeders(we dominate probably what 1% of the commercial industry) explaing what kind of performance is required in the industry. What is performance? We think it is 1800# cows and calves with 110# bwt's.Thats performance? I hate the big yearling epd cattle of all breeds. I know in the 80's I would keep all my 110 performance ratio heifer calves. This the worst mistake I ever made. Alot of the 100 indexing heifers would have made the best cows. They would have had the best stayability and money making ability of all of them. So many of these type cattle got dumped for "performance cattle". jmo
 

garybob

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
1,634
Location
NW Arkansas
knabe said:
i agree he looks thick in his lower quarter, but i'd still like to see it rather than hair if that's one of his strongest features.  he is thick elsewhere and deep and lacks the sloppiness i've seen in the JPJ's.
Is it "sloppiness", or do-ability and fleshing ease, that you are referring to? For so many years, everybody has seen Shorthorns that look like Red Holsteins ( which are often described bt the "Me, too" breeders as clean fronted and feminine). I think what needs to happen is evrybody's eyes (including Junior College and University Judging Coaches--not just breeders') need to be retrained.

GB
 

justintime

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
4,346
Location
Saskatchewan Canada
aj said:
Altitude,longitude, air quality, all seem to affect the shorthorn bwt's. Too much nutrition is also a problem for the shorthorn bwt's. The way you hold your mouth also affects bwt's. The trumps, rodeo drives......and all of the popular showring cattle have big bwt's. Judges are trained to pic these cattle. No one changes type or cattle. I am waiting for someone to invent a cooler type low gravity room to sell to Shorthorn breeders to weigh their calves in in order to get them under 100#'s. We won't change our cattle. We are stuck in a rut with a bunch of "me too" breeders who all use the same genetics. I think the lower yearling epd cattle will come into favor. It may take another 10 years. But people are figuring out that a plus 100 yearling epd angus bull is not optimum. Same with a plus 40 shorthorn bull. |There will be optimum (sustainable) performance levels figured. I always get a kick out of us shorthorn breeders(we dominate probably what 1% of the commercial industry) explaing what kind of performance is required in the industry. What is performance? We think it is 1800# cows and calves with 110# bwt's.Thats performance? I hate the big yearling epd cattle of all breeds. I know in the 80's I would keep all my 110 performance ratio heifer calves. This the worst mistake I ever made. Alot of the 100 indexing heifers would have made the best cows. They would have had the best stayability and money making ability of all of them. So many of these type cattle got dumped for "performance cattle". jmo

These things don't just affect Shorthorn BWs. I spend a fair amount of time with Angus people, and I have some good friends that raise Black and Red Angus cattle. They are also having big BWs. One of my friends is using an Angus herd sire with a reported BW of 80 lbs, yet he is experiencing lots of calves between 110-120 lbs. I am hearing that many are also experiencing the same thing from well known Angus AI sires.

I will also disagree with the general statement that ALL Trump and Rodeo Drive and popular show ring cattle, have high BWs. That simply is not the case. TM Gus is one of the most popular show ring bulls I can remember in recent times, and he has a very moderate BW.  TM Dazzler was another very popular show bull who had a veyr moderate BW. DFS Gold 002 had an actual BW of 83 lbs and he was a very popular Champion from a few years ago.There are several others if you look back over the past few years. There were also some that had bigger BWs but they are not the only ones that make the show ring.  I personally have used 3 sons of Rodeo Drive in my herd as herd bulls. Two of these bulls were absolute calving ease machines. The third bull was not a calving ease sire, however, he had some bigger BW Western Canadian straight beef breeding on his dam's side , and I suspect this may have been where some of the BW issues came from. I never had to touch calves from mature cows, however, I would not have used him on heifers. The other two sons were used on heifers for many years and I had tremendous calving ease from them. One of these bulls may have been the easiest calving sire I have ever used, and he is the grand sire of one of my favorite heifer bulls of all time... a bull named Shadybrook Optimum 75F.

I have not got as much experience with the Trump lines, however, the few I have used, have not caused any increase in calving problems.

As far as performance goes, I don't think there are many breeders of any breed, who are chasing big yearling weights. That said, there has to be some element of performance in these cattle. Both the commercial man and the feedlot man sell their cattle by the pound, so performance has to have some importance. Performance is not everything, but neither is low BW.
I have raised 8 breeds of purebred cattle  in my adult lifetime. I have been a licenced and bonded feedlot order buyer, and I have operated and fed thousands of head of all breeds in our feedlot. I know cattlemen in all aspects of the industry, and when I am referring to performance requirements for the industry, I am not just referring to the Shorthorns I raise. I am talking in general terms about what the people I know in all segments of the industry talk about. Here is an example... We had a bull in our test that had a 78 lb BW and he also had a great profile and was very eye appealing. The only real problem I could see in him, was that he had a yearling weight of 900 lbs.  That simply is not enough performance for the beef industry I work in. The feedlot people are wanting finished steers that can go to the rail with a hanging weight of 800 to 950 lbs, and that is higher than was wanted even 5 years ago.

There are more people looking for easy fleshing genetics today that at any other time I can remember. Yes, some are still chasing the fads, but that will  happen in any era. I think too many people still maintain that the only way to get efficient, easy fleshing cattle is to make them smaller. That simply is not the only way to do it. There are some bigger framed cattle that will do the same thing.
 

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
The wda of age in the shorthorn breed is a joke. It is the big thing in the showring. It leads to 1800# cows. If the feedlot people want that kind of cattle why don't they go out and buy all the grassland. It's cause they are smart. The dumbass cow calf guy ends up spending all the capital of land ownership and the feedlot slip and buy the cattle. |If feedlot performance is so important for cattle to gain 6 pounds aday in the feedlot. Explain this to me. Feedlot people hate brahamn cattle. They don't gain in the feedlots. They can't take cold weather. Why in the world is there cattle with ear then? Are people stupid? What it is that there are environments where these cattle are tops. They can fight mosquitos and flys. They adapt to hot weather. They do well in the desert and they do well in the swamp of florida. Feedlot people hate them. Packers hate them.....but they make money in enviroments that are tough. They make money even if they take discounts on their calves. If you would turn out one of your canadian show cows in these enviroments they wouldn't wean a calf cause they would be dead. It is the responsibility of the cow calf guy to look after themselves. They want to wean as many pounds on an acre of grass as they can with VERY LITTLE INPUT. It is not my responsibility to make Sullivan supply and bruno's supplement hut and the feedlot guy money. All I am saying is your showring cattle are terrible in most enviroment. You never put put enviromental pressure on them(cause they are all- american or whatever. I know you have more money then god and are older than moses but I don't give a damn wether you are licensed or not. The Shorthorn breed is a maternal breed. They shouldn't look like maines. The cow shouldn't weigh 1800 #'s. You shouldn't lie on birth dates and birth weights. You shouldn't calves cows in barns. You shouldn't have a video system in there to watch them. You shouldn't feed them three tons of hay a winter per cow. You shouldn't air their butts. There are different cattle for different enviroments and different purposes. If you don't like how the commercial people do things in the states maybe we ought to close the american borders back up. I don't want to have you set up a straw man and knock him down or hear about some antedotal evidence about how great the 110 # bwt cattle are compared to one angus ranch. Thats my story and I am sticking to it. Change the damn genetics...lower the bwt's.
 

Endless Meadows

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
160
I did get to see Capiche at the farm before Denver.  He definitely stood out and is way different, in a good way, than most shorthorn bulls.  If memory serves correct he was just under a frame 5 in Denver but still had over a 14 inch eye.  The other bull I really liked was King Jazz.  Does anyone know if semen is available on that bull?
 

justintime

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
4,346
Location
Saskatchewan Canada
aj... you seem to be missing my point. I agree that we need to lower the top end of our BWs. Nobody wants them. Absolutely nobody. What my main concern is that if we all go chasing the lowest BWs we can get, what other economical traits are we giving up? If low BW is your main concern, use a Longhorn bull. There is lots of research out there now, and lots of work done especially in Australia on selection for low BW and using low BWs sires for generations. It has been proven that pelvic measurements decrease in size after selection for low BWs for too long a period. Should we not be talking more about calving ease rather than just low BWs. I band every bull calf with a BW of 110 or more. None above that are spared, no matter how good they are or if they have pure golden genetics.  That may be 100 lb in some southern herds, or in other environments. I started this 8 years ago now, and I have not had a single complaint about calving issues from my bull buyers. I have one commercial buyer who buys one or two bulls every year, and this spring he purchased his 14th bull.He hardly never sees a cow calve as they calve in the hills and he keeps coming back. I think that tells me he is not having too many calving issues. The majority of my bulls sell to repeat buyers each year.

I think you have probably insulted the breeders and owners of some pretty good cattle, in most every breed, with your statements about all cattle that walk in a show ring are no earthly good. I would suggest that you take a look at some of the biggest and most successful commercial Angus bull sales in Montana, and see how many of the bulls selling in these sales are grandsons of some  great show bull. Why is it, that when you go to Denver, many of the  best producers of commercial bulls in the land are standing at ringside. I am sure they don't like all the show winners, but that is no different than anyone else. We all have to pick and choose.  A number of years ago, we took a herd bull and 13 of his calves and displayed them in front of the Exchange building at Denver. We sold 11 of the 13 head with only two selling to purebred breeders. The ones we sold to commercial breeders averaged almost $500 more than the two heifers sold to breeders. I was overwhelmed by the commercial interest we had, and we sold groups of bulls to two of these ranches for several years following this. The $1500 we spent on the stall space and the cost of the trip was probably the best investment we ever made.

I am only saying that we all need to be careful in this breeding game, and single trait selection ( such as selection for low BWs) is often not good in the long run. You seem to think that I am saying that the way you run your cattle is wrong. I am certainly not saying that at all. I have never seen your place and I would have no right to tell you what kind of cattle you should raise. I am thinking that you and I both run our cattle similarly in that, we try to run our cow herds as commercially as possible.  My cows seldom see a  barn or shed. Most calve on grass, or in open sheds. Most of our calves come from March - May so most of them do not need to be inside, and they are only inside until a baby calf is dry and nursed. We run way too many cattle to keep them inside very long. I have never used a video camera, and I have no intention of ever getting one. I check the cows at 11 pm and only stay up if something is starting to calve, otherwise, they are in God's hands until 6 am.Most years, over 98% of our calves are completely born unassisted, including our heifers. Basically, the only ones I assist are malpresentations. I try to manage my cows and heifers to calve on their own, whenever possible. Sometimes our weather conditions do not allow us to do this all the time.  I do not think that I raise show ring cattle. There is a big difference between breeding show stock and showing breeding stock. We show at 1 show every year, with an additional show every few years. I do not go to shows to win ribbons, but I go to shows to meet people, and to compare what I am producing with other breeders. It is hard to pay bills with ribbons and banners. I have sold many head over the years to commercial producers who have come to the show to see the cattle. Believe me, I would gladly stop showing in a heart beat if it wasn't so important to me making a decent living. In 2008 I banded two bull calves that had BWs over 110 lbs. Every other bull calf born in this year was sold in the spring of 2009 as a breeding bull. Over 80% went to commercial cattlemen. Are you suggesting that I am doing something wrong in my breeding program? I raise cattle to make a living and because I cannot think of anything I would rather do. I dread the day, that I can no longer go out every day and work with my cattle, but I also realize that this day will come. I hope I am smart enough to realize when I should quit. I probably will always own cattle, and I probably will always have a few to look after for as long as my body will allow me to do so. I cull my cows on how functional they are, and on their ability to pay their own way. I will keep a big cow if she proves she can pay her way. I have a ton  plus cow that generated my top selling bull this spring and also generated over $25,000 in embryo sales in the last 6 months.She averaged 27 grade 1 embryos in 6 flushes and settled to an AI service 12 days after her last flush.  Are you suggesting she should be shipped? Since I have owned this cow, she has never had a calf over 105 lbs at birth. I find it interesting that the majority of her embryos have sold to Australia into some herds that are experiencing a severe drought for the last 5 years. Do I want to have all my cows like her?  Probably not. She is unique and she is also one of the easiest fleshing cows I have ever owned. She never sees grain, and always raises a good calf. I am not for 1 minute suggesting big cows are the answer. I am just pointing out that you cannot make blanket statements that all big cows are bad cows.

I have no issues with the way you raise your cattle, or the type of cattle you think work best in your environment and with the management systems you want to provide. You are surviving so you are obviously are doing something right. My issue is with your blanket statements such as "the trumps, rodeo drives and all of the  popular showring cattle have big bwts. " I just responded that I did not agree with this blanket statement, as I know from my experience it is not correct. There are good and bad cattle in every bloodline, and there are some good cattle that get shown, and some that don't. There is a very popular bull that is promoted on this site from time to time as being one of the best calving ease sires in the business right now. I am not going to even mention this bulls name as I do not feel it is my place to bash a bull on the two calves I have had from him. I have only had two calves from this sire, and both were bulls. The first weighed 122 lbs at birth, the second was 115 lbs. Both were born unassisted and both were excellent calves. They were both banded before they were dry, even though they would have made excellent herd bulls for someone. I am not going to dispute this bull as being a calving ease sire, simply because he sired some big BW calves  in my herd. Both calves were born very easily in minutes, and the only issue was their BWs.  I would not even if they were hard pulls as I would be basing my judgment on two calves, and this is not right. Obviously some other factors were at play in this case. Sometimes, combinations of genetics seem to work to generate these types of surprises.

I am not sure if you are accusing me of lieing  on birth dates and birth weights, but if you are, I take great exception to this. You can accuse me of a lot of things but I really have to take exception where my integrity is concerned. If you weren't, I apologize for even stating this, but I thought I had to set the record straight if you were. As for being richer than god, you made me laugh out loud at that one. I make my living from cows... that should be all you need to know. I also have to say that I have spent my entire lifetime chasing cows,  and that is about all I have ever done. This business is not for the weak hearted, and I have seen more than my share of drought, financial disasters and pure wrecks. If I were to dwell on the bad stuff that has happened I am sure I would be dead by now.Believe me, this has not been an easy road I have chosen as my life's work.  I have made many mistakes, but I hope I have learned a little from each of them.

You say it is not your responsibility to make the feedlot guy money. I would suggest that you had better hope the feedlot guy makes some money as he is your market. I was in that game for several years and I know that most of these guys know who's cattle worked for them, and who's did not. When I was buying cattle, I oftentimes would have a feedlot manager tell me that he did not want to buy cattle from certain cattlemen, unless they were at discount prices, because the cattle they purchased before did not work. You see this in every auction market in N America. When a reputation ranch sells their calves, the buyers are all paying attention, and they are trying to own some of them. I would hope,that no matter what conditions any of us raise our cattle in, that we are try to produce cattle that work for the end user, no matter if that is you, or the feedlot owner.

This thread has got way off the original subject. I personally liked the bull that Select Sires purchased, the best of all the bulls in that pen of bulls in Denver. He is the most correct and the soundest structured. I like the fact that he has a good lower quarter, and I think he is a sire who will work well on many bigger framed cattle. I am not convinced yet, that he will be the ultimate calving ease sire to use on heifers because of his low BW. That was my original post, in which I only mentioned that we all need to consider more than BW when selecting calving ease sires. From that comment, you seem to have taken it that I am suggesting we need our cattle all to be big and have huge BWs. Not so. I am only saying that if you had a bull that you have used for 3 years and have not touched a calf at birth, yet his calves BWs are 100 or more lbs, why is this totally wrong? I am NOT suggesting that this is totally right either, but if it is working for you, is it still wrong? You seem to suggest that this would never be right. If this is what you are saying, I think it is again another blanket statement, which I do not agree totally with. It may indeed not be perfection, but it still works for you.

If you have understood what I have written in previous posts, I am a great believer in optimum genetics. Too much or too little of any trait is not where we should be, in my opinion. This reasoning also stands the test for everything in our lives as well. I cannot think of anything that is not best in optimum amounts.Whether it be BWs, cow size, rib eye area, money in your bank account, food you eat, hours you work, etc etc etc.... everything is the best in your life in optimum amounts. That is all I am trying to say.
 

Telos

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,267
Location
Dallas, Texas
Question?  Should we pay more attention to breed these cattle to grow stouter as they age and not be born so stout?  Is that just an antagonistic concept? From my experience you have to have some European breeds in the equation to have desired performance.
 

TMJ Show Cattle

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
1,020
Desired performance is and always will be in the eye of the beholder. Both post have merit,because that what works for them. You can argue til you are blue in the face,and they both will think he is right.Thats the way it should be.There is no right or wrong,just opinions.You can't raise cattle in Georgia the same way as you do in Montana.Good cattle adapt to whatever enviornment they are put in. Hell, years ago they drove Longhorns and Mexican cattle north to Wyoming and Montana and they survived. Most all of the good cattle that have found their way to some of the great southern states of Alabama and Georgia and Florida have come from northern herds,and they survive and adapt. I see no reason if you have 100lb. birthweights with no calving problems,to ever think you need otherwise. Same goe's for the opposite breeder also. After all of this is said and done,Jake's Proud Jazz genetics are being used around the world with better than average results in all kinds of climates. I like the looks of CAPICHE, I hope he sires something for everyone.
 

CAB

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
5,607
Location
Corning,Iowa
  Back to the original question, as well as JPJ has been doing it, why not use him instead of the unproven sons unless you are sure that they will bring something to the table that you can't get from JPJ. JMO.
 

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
O.K. .......I stand corrected. It is ok to have 110# bwt calves. It is ok to have 1800# cows. I live in the heart of the cattle feeding area of the world. We sit on the Ogalalah aquifer. |It is a good environment to feed cattle. We have the water, the corn, and decent weather. It is cheaper to haul cattle here and feed them than it is to haul corn to say West Virginia and feed them as I understand it. I won reserve champ pen(rate of gain) in last years Shorthorn Assn's "proof positve" feedlot competition at Montezuma Ks. It was over 4 pounds aday. Wakurua beat me.Dang them guys. ;D
 

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
Dang........is this discussion over........holy moses.......lord forgive me. Just kidding jit. ;D
 

justintime

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
4,346
Location
Saskatchewan Canada
garybob said:
knabe said:
i agree he looks thick in his lower quarter, but i'd still like to see it rather than hair if that's one of his strongest features.  he is thick elsewhere and deep and lacks the sloppiness i've seen in the JPJ's.
Is it "sloppiness", or do-ability and fleshing ease, that you are referring to? For so many years, everybody has seen Shorthorns that look like Red Holsteins ( which are often described bt the "Me, too" breeders as clean fronted and feminine). I think what needs to happen is evrybody's eyes (including Junior College and University Judging Coaches--not just breeders') need to be retrained.

GB

I agree GaryBob, too many people confuse femininity with fraility.
 

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
Wonder about the gestation length of jpj calves. I know ohldes angus bulls tend to shorten up gestation.
 

shortdawg

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
6,520
Location
Georgia
My JPJ"s have been born from 3 - 8 days early - none late. Will have more this year so maybe I can add some info later. As for how JPJ's perform in a heavy feeding situation - we had one that took a while to get to his desired weight but did get there and another that gained 220 lbs in 46 days. The latter was the one we won Reserve Grand with last year at our State Show. I really don't think you would sacrifice any performance when breeding him to cattle that perform well. The K-Kim heifer that topped their sale last year had the heaviest weaning weight among her peers and was sired by JPJ.
 

shorties

Active member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
33
JIT, This is your statement..."The feedlot people are wanting finished steers that can go to the rail with a hanging weight of 800 to 950 lbs, and that is higher than was wanted even 5 years ago".  Acorrding to USDA anything over 900 LBS gets Discounted so why would you want your performance to lead you to that weight.  With a 60% dressing weight your steer would weigh 1500LBS that is TO big.  With the average age of slaughter cattle being 13 months or roughly being on feed for 185 day and gaining 3.5 while on feed that means your cows should be weaning a calf that weighs 850 pounds now i will say that some calves do weigh that but that only a few.  So I just wanted to adjust what your classification of performance is.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
well, boxed cattle is not what i want for size, so i butchered a steer at 1750, dressed at 58% 7 months on feed.  had about .5-.55 back fat and low choice to choice marbling.
 

vcsf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
294
Location
Saskatchewan, Canada
shorties said:
JIT, This is your statement..."The feedlot people are wanting finished steers that can go to the rail with a hanging weight of 800 to 950 lbs, and that is higher than was wanted even 5 years ago".  Acorrding to USDA anything over 900 LBS gets Discounted so why would you want your performance to lead you to that weight.  With a 60% dressing weight your steer would weigh 1500LBS that is TO big.  With the average age of slaughter cattle being 13 months or roughly being on feed for 185 day and gaining 3.5 while on feed that means your cows should be weaning a calf that weighs 850 pounds now i will say that some calves do weigh that but that only a few.  So I just wanted to adjust what your classification of performance is.


I will not comment on the topic of carcass weight but I really question where you come up with 13 months as an average age at slaughter.  I do not have any stats available but I would almost guarantee that the average slaughter age is a lot closer to 18 months than it is to 13.
 

showsteerdlux

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
1,765
Location
Western NC
shorties said:
JIT, This is your statement..."The feedlot people are wanting finished steers that can go to the rail with a hanging weight of 800 to 950 lbs, and that is higher than was wanted even 5 years ago".  Acorrding to USDA anything over 900 LBS gets Discounted so why would you want your performance to lead you to that weight.   is.
That weight has now been pushed to 1,000 pounds hanging weight according to the USDA marketing guys that I have talked to in the past few months.
 
Top