Shorty Folks

[KFShorthorns]

Interesting 'purity' conversation no doubt. As a relative new comer to the purebred side of shorthorns it's always interesting to see how these conversations play out and to piece together history and some of what has gone on in different associations.  I was recently given Volume 1 of the Dominion Shorthorn Herdbook, published in 1886. It details the first importations of purebred shorthorns to Canada in 1825, with some detail of US imports before that. There is an entire chapter describing the struggles that the American and Canadian (British-American or Dominion) associations had with defining 'purebred', in the early 1800's.  Originally only imported British cattle (of Coates HB) and their offspring were allowed in the american herd book, but then for a couple years they allowed any cattle that had been crossed 4 times with pure, imported british stock to be registered as purebred. This was disallowed a few years later, but the crossed catttle were never removed from the american herdbook. With the first print of the Dominion of Canada herdbook there was discussion of these cattle and their progeny, that had now made their way into Canada, and decided that they would not be included in the herdbook because they did not trace completely back to imported british stock. In the first editions of the Canadian Shorthorn herdbook, in the 1860's (prior to the Dominion Shorthorn book I have of 1886) it would appear 14 'grade' canadian bred shorthorn cows were registered as pure, these cows and there offspring were exluded from the Dominion Shorthorn book printed in 1886. I do not know of which book (Canada or Dominion) our current association registry was built, though I'd be interested to find out! JIT? Okotoks? Coyote? any of you guys able to fill in some of that?

Things have obviously changed in the association's since then, with the asterisk cattle and grading up and allowing non-pedigree cattle inat various times, but by the statements made in the 1880's it would seem to me that alot of cattle that may appear 'purebred' by the american association very well could trace back to these cattle that were allowed in the registry in the early 1800's that WERE NOT indeed purebreds.

More food for thought anyway, the debate rages on.

Cheers <beer>

 

[Okotoks]

Interesting 'purity' conversation no doubt. As a relative new comer to the purebred side of shorthorns it's always interesting to see how these conversations play out and to piece together history and some of what has gone on in different associations.  I was recently given Volume 1 of the Dominion Shorthorn Herdbook, published in 1886. It details the first importations of purebred shorthorns to Canada in 1825, with some detail of US imports before that. There is an entire chapter describing the struggles that the American and Canadian (British-American or Dominion) associations had with defining 'purebred', in the early 1800's.  Originally only imported British cattle (of Coates HB) and their offspring were allowed in the american herd book, but then for a couple years they allowed any cattle that had been crossed 4 times with pure, imported british stock to be registered as purebred. This was disallowed a few years later, but the crossed catttle were never removed from the american herdbook. With the first print of the Dominion of Canada herdbook there was discussion of these cattle and their progeny, that had now made their way into Canada, and decided that they would not be included in the herdbook because they did not trace completely back to imported british stock. In the first editions of the Canadian Shorthorn herdbook, in the 1860's (prior to the Dominion Shorthorn book I have of 1886) it would appear 14 'grade' canadian bred shorthorn cows were registered as pure, these cows and there offspring were exluded from the Dominion Shorthorn book printed in 1886. I do not know of which book (Canada or Dominion) our current association registry was built, though I'd be interested to find out! JIT? Okotoks? Coyote? any of you guys able to fill in some of that?

Things have obviously changed in the association's since then, with the asterisk cattle and grading up and allowing non-pedigree cattle inat various times, but by the statements made in the 1880's it would seem to me that alot of cattle that may appear 'purebred' by the american association very well could trace back to these cattle that were allowed in the registry in the early 1800's that WERE NOT indeed purebreds.

More food for thought anyway, the debate rages on.

Cheers <beer>

The Canadian Shorthorn Association was organized January 12, 1886 by amalgamation of Canada and British North American Herd Book Associations. It was originally called the Dominion Shorthorn Breeder's Association. My 1918 Herd Book is DOMINION SHORT-HORN HERD BOOK but my 1938 edition is CANADIAN SHORTHORN HERD BOOK. Not sure when the name change ocurred, will have to check it out. I was given a very complete set of the American Shorthorn Herdbooks but only have some of the Canadian copies. The American Shorthorn books start in the 1860's. Also shown on the cover as American Short Horn Herd Book. I'm not sure when Shorthorn became one word but all the older books show it hyphenated or two words.

 

[justintime]

I have a complete set of the Canadian Shorthorn herdbooks from 1886 to 1954. There were 2 or 3 years during WW 2 that herd books were not printed. It is hard to fathom how may Shorthorns there were in Canada in the 20s and 30s. I haven't looked at the for awhile, but there are a couple years in the late 20s where they published 2 books ( both with 500 + pages to list the registrations in that year). Over these years the rules have changed numerous times, and I have found several cases of cattle registered as purebred where one parent is not registered. I can only assume that these may have been purebred, but not registered .... but they may not have been purebred at all. It leaves some unanswered questions for sure. In my opinion, it certainly does not matter. I cannot see how anything that happened 80- 90 years ago could affect what we are doing now.

I wish these herd books had continued until today as I would love to show how there was not much thought put into rule changes at the association level. I was asked by the Canadian Shorthorn Association if I would inspect non registered cattle that had Shorthorn characteristics and I agreed to do this, and did for almost 20 years. I was to visit Shorthorn herds that had quit registering and if they had no records, I could allow these females into the herd book at 3/4 level in the graded up herd book. At 7/8 level, these animals were allowed to enter the closed herd book for several years. . Some of these herds had very good records, and I did get quite a number of these cattle back into the herd books.... and many of them were excellent females. I have been able to trace several of these cattle in some of today's pedigrees, and some of them are included in cowherds that are supposedly 100% status. In 1974, I purchased an herd in Ontario and in this group there were 2 Simmental X Shorthorn half blood cows. I sold some 7/8 female descendants of these cows in one of my production sales and when they were transferred to their new owners, they were given registration papers as PB in the closed herd book ... because they had reached purebred status in the appendix book. I can still find these cows in the pedigrees of some Shorthorns considered to be 100%. ( I only mention some of these things to show that the closed herd book is not as " closed " as many think it is.  I could go on and on as there are hundreds of examples.
I remember being at a sale in the 80s and a breeder telling me that he had purchased some red females in Montana and he sure wished they had been registered. He said he did not know the breeding in them. I told him that I could stop on my way home and inspect them and if I thought they had Shorthorn characteristics, I could record them at the 3/4 level. He was eager for me to do this. These females have been bred up since then, and their descendants are now in the so called " purebred" herd book. I find it a bit ironic that this herd today claims to be totally 100% Shorthorn despite having some cow families that started from females of unknown heritage. I also find it interesting that the owner of this herd ( he has now retired, and the herd is now owned by relatives) was the first person to purchase semen from our imported Irish sire who at that time had no registration status of any kind. He used this semen in his herd and then lobbied to get the Irish cattle dumped into the closed herd book.  Lots of interesting stuff..... but really what does it matter? The cattle are judged by people outside the breed, on their own merit, along with the reputation of their owner. It is only people inside the breed who discriminate on their supposed heritage, and usually they can only go by whether there is an * before the registration number as they do not understand enough about pedigrees to do a search themselves .
When I look at lots of other breeds, it seems to me that the most popular cattle are those that have been bred up to PB status from other breeds. The quality of the cattle should be the most important factor, and that is why I try to use cattle that I think will work for me, regardless where they come from.

 

[aj]

I'm with JIT on this one. I do think with the new technologies it will tighten things up and eliminate honest mistakes anyway. I have been messing around linebreeding 50% Red Angus and 50% Shorthorns. I've wondered if I started upgrading to purebred Shorthorns.....how dna tests would record data? If you bred a half blood back to 15-16ths.......3 generations.......I assume the Red Angus would show up somewhere. Then also the genetic make up of cattle affects the genestar testing also doesn't it?

 

[RyanChandler]

The associations need to speak with a geneticist, not brother bill when establishing a set 'purebred %.'  It should be at a % where theres no longer gene expression from the infused breed. 15/16ths IMO is WAY short of this. And to think some associations consider 3/4 and 7/8ths a purebred 

AJ, is every animal in your breeding program an F1?

 

[aj]

x-bar. This year we did not ai. On the cows......we turned out two 50%-50% bulls......full brothers...in two pastures. They ran with some purebred Shorthorn cows and some half bloods. Quite a few were half sib matings. Breeding one full brother to the other full brothers daughters ......some matings would be a grandson back on aunt.......are those cattle terms? I intend to purchase a purebred shorty bull to back with........would leave me purebreds. Essentially I am concentrating on composites......trying to keep the 50% deal bout the same. T may gear bcak up to purebred shorties.......and I am considering starting a small Red Angus herd. I'm 55 years old so I probably only have15 years of life yet to do anything.

 

[aj]

To me it would be so cool to have a little production sale with purebred Red Angus and a few purebred Shorthorns..........and composites in between......that all looked alike pretty much......kinda like Pelton guys model here in Kansas. He started out with simmental 20 years ago and kinda morphed into using Red Angus. Now he sells purebreds of both breeds and composites. I think he was Red Angus breeder of the year a year or so back.

 

[oakview]

My suggestions for the remaining 15 years you have (let's hope there are many more) are to do what you want and enjoy every minute of it.  If you like what the Red Angus/Shorthorn hybrid is doing, then have at it and you have my sincere wishes you are rewarded handsomly.

 

[Okotoks]

Interesting 'purity' conversation no doubt. As a relative new comer to the purebred side of shorthorns it's always interesting to see how these conversations play out and to piece together history and some of what has gone on in different associations.  I was recently given Volume 1 of the Dominion Shorthorn Herdbook, published in 1886. It details the first importations of purebred shorthorns to Canada in 1825, with some detail of US imports before that. There is an entire chapter describing the struggles that the American and Canadian (British-American or Dominion) associations had with defining 'purebred', in the early 1800's.  Originally only imported British cattle (of Coates HB) and their offspring were allowed in the american herd book, but then for a couple years they allowed any cattle that had been crossed 4 times with pure, imported british stock to be registered as purebred. This was disallowed a few years later, but the crossed catttle were never removed from the american herdbook. With the first print of the Dominion of Canada herdbook there was discussion of these cattle and their progeny, that had now made their way into Canada, and decided that they would not be included in the herdbook because they did not trace completely back to imported british stock. In the first editions of the Canadian Shorthorn herdbook, in the 1860's (prior to the Dominion Shorthorn book I have of 1886) it would appear 14 'grade' canadian bred shorthorn cows were registered as pure, these cows and there offspring were exluded from the Dominion Shorthorn book printed in 1886. I do not know of which book (Canada or Dominion) our current association registry was built, though I'd be interested to find out! JIT? Okotoks? Coyote? any of you guys able to fill in some of that?

Things have obviously changed in the association's since then, with the asterisk cattle and grading up and allowing non-pedigree cattle inat various times, but by the statements made in the 1880's it would seem to me that alot of cattle that may appear 'purebred' by the american association very well could trace back to these cattle that were allowed in the registry in the early 1800's that WERE NOT indeed purebreds.

More food for thought anyway, the debate rages on.

Cheers <beer>

The Canadian Shorthorn Association was organized January 12, 1886 by amalgamation of Canada and British North American Herd Book Associations. It was originally called the Dominion Shorthorn Breeder's Association. My 1918 Herd Book is DOMINION SHORT-HORN HERD BOOK but my 1938 edition is CANADIAN SHORTHORN HERD BOOK. Not sure when the name change ocurred, will have to check it out. I was given a very complete set of the American Shorthorn Herdbooks but only have some of the Canadian copies. The American Shorthorn books start in the 1860's. Also shown on the cover as American Short Horn Herd Book. I'm not sure when Shorthorn became one word but all the older books show it hyphenated or two words.

I had CLRC check their herd books as they have complete sets.
They have Canadian Herd Books that are from 1867-1884, then the Dominion start at 1886-1932, then the Canadian start from 1934 on.

 

[garybob]

This is a good discussion and there have been many good points made.I think the only problem that may arise from the '' native'' programs would be that at some point purity may become the sole factor in making breeding decisions setting aside the other profit traits,a Bates round 2.
Speaking of the Haumont cattle XBAR,here is a 2 yr.old 108 son out of a Haumont Cherry Blossom in our reserve pen.

Have any pics of this guy's dam?

GB

 

[RyanChandler]

To me it would be so cool to have a little production sale with purebred Red Angus and a few purebred Shorthorns..........and composites in between......that all looked alike pretty much......kinda like Pelton guys model here in Kansas. He started out with simmental 20 years ago and kinda morphed into using Red Angus. Now he sells purebreds of both breeds and composites. I think he was Red Angus breeder of the year a year or so back.

Cattle that look alike tend to perform alike.  Form follows Function.  If there's not considerably hybrid vigor expression in the crossbreds, I don't see the point in incorporating them?

 

[aj]

The Red Angus....you mean? The f1 cross shows hybrid vigor. The f1 x f1 shows less I think mainly because of the half sister bred to a half brother mating. I have had some interest in my cattle cause people thought they were red angus. The color looks red angus like. It seems like the commercial guys like the Durham Red type cattle cause they look like Red Angus. Shorthorn breeders hate the Durham Red type deal cause the cattle look like Red Angus. Seems like some people are getting off the black hide fad around here and are accepting the solid red hides(they assume the cattle are Red Angus). I guess I would consider a composite that has been line bred 3 or 4 generations......almost like a new breed.....if they are are selected for consistency.......and don't have the bouncing around of bw'ts 60# to 110#s back to an 80#er back to a 100#er etc etc.

 

[Doc]

This is a pic of 2 year old 1st calf heifer that is 1/4 Red Angus x 3/4 Shorthorn.

 

[JTM]

Unless you attach a certain level of nostalgia to using the asterisk free, I think it's ill advised to make selections solely on whether they carry it or not.


Again, I'll ask JTM or anyone really:

If you have the time, I wouldn't mind seeing some reg #s of these asterick free cattle that have comparable performance but don't have Irish or Canadian breeding up close.  I found some RB cattle that were close but then you see lots of Canadian influence within a couple generations. "

Not sure anyone said that they didn't have Canadian breeding in the pedigree. So I really don't get what you are eluding to. Of course it's ill advised to make purchasing decisions based solely on whether they were asterisk or not. Asterisk free is asterisk free whether or not it has Canadian or not. We can discuss and debate the formula for asterisk free but it is what it is and I see value in asterisk free cattle in the ASA herd book that can perform comparably to Maine Anjou or other influenced Shorthorn cattle on a consistent basis. There are a number of bulls currently listed asterisk free in the ASA herdbook that would definitely qualify for creating these comparable performing cattle. I would even say that they would outperform them in most cases when analyzing multiple traits and looking at percentage of pounds sold per pounds bred.  As far as my knowledge, this is only a recent development but I believe it speaks volumes of the potential in the breed right now.

 

[irishshorthorns]

Interesting choice of words Xbar "Valuing asterick free cattle that carry Irish blood is valuing deception." When did you become the go to person regarding Irish cattle and their bloodlines? How do you know what Irish cattle aren't fullblood? Have you seen these cattle or do you have first hand experience of them? If so can you quote the reg# of the cattle so we can take it up with the breeders?

 

[RyanChandler]

Seeing how the Irish Cattle's pedigrees terminate into 'foundation stock,' how can you refer to these animal of unknown origins as 'Fullbloods?'

Do you really want me to take the time to post reg #s of the Irish cattle whose pedigrees have no continuation?

 

[irishshorthorns]

All pedigrees come to a full stop or dead-end when you follow them back far enough. I have a copy of volume III  of Coates herdbook and there are no six generations of pedigree in that.

 

[RyanChandler]

Get real. Surely you're not trying to compare the infusion of these undocumented Irish cattle 40 years ago to that of the breeds inception 170 years ago?? 

JIT posted this awhile back and until someone more credible convinces me otherwise, I will stick w/ this:

"In regards to some of the Irish Shorthorns not blood typing to typical Shorthorn blood types, I spoke with the head of the Blood Typing lab from Ohio State at the Graham Land and Livestock dispersal in Minnesota. He said that many of the Irish cattle had totally different blood types than any other cattle of any breed. Some had blood types closer to full blood Maines.  I remember him saying that Dividend's blood type was very strange as it was very close to some horse blood types.It was totally non typical to any other bovine blood types they had seen at that time. These cattle were indeed very strange in many ways. This is why we argued to keep the Irish cattle in the appendix herd books and the Canadian breeders voted to put them in the closed herd books. I find it ironic that the people who imported these cattle were the only people who voted against putting the Irish cattle into the closed herd book . When this happened, I decided that it really did not matter whether an animal had an asterisk on it's pedigree or not as they were probably as pure or purer than many cattle in the closed herd books.

 

[irishshorthorns]

It's interesting how some bloodtyped close to some Maines. It's probably because true Rouge des Prix probably did have lots of Shorthorn blood - therefore an Irish bred Shorthorn and a breed derived from a Shorthorn will be similar in blood type. This would be however before American breeders infused Jersey, Holstein, Ayrshire, Charolais, Simmental and Red Angus (to name but a few) into their ahem 'Shorthorn' and Maine Anjou cattle. If you like Ryan I can send you a video of Shorthorn cattle being shown at the Royal Dublin Society Spring Show at the turn of the last century just to disabuse you of your idea that Irish Shorthorns suddenly APPEARED in the 1970's after they were DISCOVERED by an American. Possibly in the same way Christopher Colombus discovered America!

 

[trevorgreycattleco]

So what is the deerpark cattle??? Or the Irish cattle? Sounds like they have been bred there for a long time. What gave the 18th?? bull that almost silvery sheen on him. He has a odd roan color to me. I think it's all water under the bridge at this point. They were useful at that time.