Shorthorn Genetic Problems

[knabe]

I pray to God every night that you.....knabe.....and your ideas......never leave the borders of California.

you asked. you didn't like the answer. sorry. i supplied a non-proliferation option. you didn't like that either.

still, you have provided no alternatives.  as usual.  keep it up troll. your hook gets longer each day.

and you didn't answer the question either. typical.

 

[knabe]

I pray to God every night that you.....knabe.....and your ideas......never leave the borders of California.

likewise. i prayed and prayed you wouldn't take a carrier to denver after railing on people who do for years.


i hope your ideas never leave your ranch again. touché. why is it so easy to point out what a hypocrite you are.

 

[knabe]

I pray to God every night that you.....knabe.....and your ideas......never leave the borders of California.

if you read between the lines, which obviously you can't, i don't like carriers other than for the fact they may have useful alleles and at some point, genetic tools will be able to utilize them.  in the mean time, it's stupid to keep proliferating them for show purposes.  just my opinion. and i would never take one to denver like you did, let alone not castrate it. you did that, i just speculate about what's possible.  i think there's a big difference between me and you. you complain about me commenting on what technology can do, you actually did it. i think it's pathetic you took that bull to denver. since we both have left our respective states, it's apparent praying is useless.

 

[mark tenenbaum]

You can also make clean ones out of carriers:although that doesnt seem to make fodder for debate.-So Olsen summed it up-if you dont like them,and want to cry about this and that rather than change them- just dont use them. O0

 

[Doc]

I will say it again. If these genetic defect genes were not considered "useful tools" by various breeders then no one would care if the breed associations implemented policies to eradicate them over time from the breed. No one would fight to defend keeping them.
These are serious, fatal genetic defects. I've experienced calves born with them and it's heart breaking to euthanize a newborn animal because it's born with TH.
And yes, I know they are heterozygous.
So, circle your wagons and defend the status quo as always.

People would care if they were no longer accepted in the breed registry. It is just like knabe, and Mark said, you breed them and get clean ones. I have a Mattis 31P daughter that is THF , that I'm very glad that someone continued to breed a carrier female to a THF bull.
You are wrong in the statement that these are fatal genetic defects. DSC is not a fatal defect.
Can't circle our wagons, you are too busy beating our horse into the ground.

 

[shortybreeder]

If the progeny can't be registered, then they can't be shown in the breed classes. That would reduce show attendance and in turn hurt the image of the breed in the show industry. Pick your poison I suppose.

 

[RyanChandler]

A simple rule prohibiting the registration of any progeny from known carrier sires born ON OR AFTER January 1st 2017 is the least aggressive and intrusive action available to eventually eradicate these genes. 

You might as well amend your suggestion now because you're going to get little to no support with this approach. Not only is it ineffective in terms of accomplish the goal --your plan still allows the propagation of carriers via the dam line-- but it's illogical as well. Any plan that would bar registration to a clean animal (just because it was sired by a carrier) is not one that can withstand any logical reasoning. Required testing of all progeny out of carriers is a much more effective approach.  The clean animals are granted registration.  Carriers are not.

 

[Okotoks]

A simple rule prohibiting the registration of any progeny from known carrier sires born ON OR AFTER January 1st 2017 is the least aggressive and intrusive action available to eventually eradicate these genes. 

You might as well amend your suggestion now because you're going to get little to no support with this approach. Not only is it ineffective in terms of accomplish the goal --your plan still allows the propagation of carriers via the dam line-- but it's illogical as well. Any plan that would bar registration to a clean animal (just because it was sired by a carrier) is not one that can withstand any logical reasoning. Required testing of all progeny out of carriers is a much more effective approach.  The clean animals are granted registration.  Carriers are not.

I agree with you XBAR, if you are going to have an effective policy it makes no sense to eliminate the clean progeny from registration.
I am curious Anst1579 whether you are a Shorthorn breeder with a policy of your own or just posting negative slanted shorthorn posts for your entertainment. Your first posts questioned the integrity of one programs photos and now this defect thread.(health as well I guess) It's an open forum and all topics are fair game but it is a lot easier to judge your perspective and reason for posting when you are not totally anonymous!

 

[librarian]

I have the same curiosity as Okotoks about why all this this advice for ASA? Are you going to invest in Shorthorns?
It's not really cool to make unsubstantiated statements like Johne's is the latest challenge to the Shorthorn breed because, in your opinion, it's more prevalent in Shorthorns.
Now anyone doing a search that includes the words Johne's and Breed is likely to come up with your opinion instead of a fact. Especially if they put the words Shorthorn in there, or Genetic Defect.
A great thing about this forum is that the participants have a lot of knowledge and integrity and really try to get at the truth of most things.
This whole thread reminds me of getting lectured by one of my kids on how to drive.

 

[jaimiediamond]

Anst1549 I guess since you are so free on your views on the breeding policies (many are extremely flawed I could happily go into them) yet are quick to ignore the question on who you are what your program is, and how you have been managing this breeds problems.  Perhaps you are just another laptop warrior? I mean I put out what we did to manage a problem speaking of transparency and whatnot

 

[librarian]

I really want to use the word Angst here.
Instead of proposing rules about making rules, why not become a 4H teacher and educate about how to research the potential for genetic defects in breeding stock.
And about the connection between management, herd health and Johne's.
Carrier sires are not the problem. Ignorance is the problem.

 

[caledon101]

I see the point being made here. Some problems are very difficult to solve but this isn't one of them. The solutions are quite simple but the will to take action doesn't seem to exist.
As long as no one cares about attracting new breeders then carry on and don't change a thing.

 

[aj]

Libra....the 4-h leaders are show ring people and I have heard that they teach say th carrier acceptance

 

[shortyjock89]

So do you.

 

[librarian]

No wonder this whole deal has seemed fishy. Anst is really aj!

 

[JTM]

All I can say is show up in Kansas City, Missouri on December 3rd and step up and do something about it.  <rock>

 

[knabe]

Libra....the 4-h leaders are show ring people and I have heard that they teach say th carrier acceptance

i think they think it's ok to take carrier bulls to denver.


see, you bring this stuff up over and over and over.  i'm never going to let you live down bringing a carrier bull to denver.


everyone should know what a hypocrite you are and that you have no credibility.


you keep bring this up, and you keep thinking i'm going to miss a post.


i'm not going to miss a post when you continue to be a hypocrite.

 

[Doc]

All I can say is show up in Kansas City, Missouri on December 3rd and step up and do something about it.  <rock>

JTM, that is a very good point. I was on a conference call last week with 20 other breeders for almost 2 hours about this meeting. They have hired Kevin Ochsner, host of Cattlemen to Cattlemen to be the moderator for this conference. They are really putting an effort into this to . They are really hoping breeders will come and *** voice their opinions and give some thoughts on what their concerns and opinions are ***. So there is your chance AJ ( and of course everyone else) to come participate . 

 

[r.n.reed]

Great point JTM and Doc!I would hope that breeders come with an attitude of wanting to build the breed and its image.

 

[oakview]

Perhaps someone can enlighten me on the rules for recording carrier animals in the Angus, Simmental, and Maine Anjou breeds.  Do you have to test an Angus for all of the genetic defects in the breed to register the calf?  Has the Angus breed lost members since the "discovery" of all their defects?  Is no one investing in Angus cattle anymore?  As long as we're going backwards in time, perhaps we should wish the Angus breed would have taken care of the influx of Holsteins way back when.  I had a discussion with our Executive Secretary almost 20 years ago when I had what turned out to be a TH calf.  He said he thought he knew the source, but until he was absolutely 100% sure, he really couldn't do too much, let alone pull papers or refuse to record future offspring.  No commercial cattleman with any genetic knowledge whatsoever should avoid a Shorthorn bull because of possible genetic defects.  No one wanting to invest in Shorthorn cattle should elect not to because of possible genetic defects.  The percentage of CLEAN genetics far outweighs the opposite.  It's no harder to select for clean genetics than the quality you want.