One thing that I don't get is how you can call EPD'S SOOOO inaccurate? If you have a calf with a bw epd of -3 you could be pretty sure that he will sire lighter weight calves than a bull with a +5. Yes they can fluctuate, but call me a sucker that doesn't believe that everyone is manipulating the numbers just to mess with the epd's. I know I dont. We as breeders for the show right need to remember that we are still in the business of producing a food product, BEEF!!! So why should more commercially acceptable traits be taken out of the show ring?
Davis I'm not going to call you anything. I never said everyone is manipulating EPD's. But some do, that's not an opinion or a guess, it's a fact. If you have a set of data and ANYTHING in that data set is inaccurate, then by definition the whole data set is inaccurate. It takes many, many, accurate progeny records to statistically cover up a few inaccurate reports. Show cattle, due to their age, don't have that. So given those facts don't you think that it's reasonable to say that EPD's on young cattle are not accurate? Don't you believe that if you have an animal that has several generations of young sires in it's immediate pedigree that the chance for the EPD's to be inaccurate statistically multiply with each generation?
As far as the show ring reflecting more commercially acceptable traits, which ones would you like to see it reflect that it doesn't already? Like I mentioned to Doc, I think it might be a problem within your breed more so than others. In most breeds easy fleshing, moderate framed, sound cattle win. I'm not sure what else could be done to be more commercially acceptable since no reasonable person can sat that there is an ideal commercial animal for all situations.
Another thing that has always puzzled me is Shorthorn breeders that are so critical of the show ring and all that term encompasses. If you look through here, you'll see the majority that want that industry to more reflect the commercial sector are Shorthorn breeders. I find that extremely ironic since by color, if for no other reason, the breed is not commercially acceptable. Herefords are red, but Shorthorns can't do what Herefords can in the environment they can do it in. If not for the infusion of those genetic defect carrying cattle and the explosion of the club calf industry the breed would be almost non existent in the US, much as are fullblood Simmental and other purebreds that have fallen by the wayside due to hide color. I'm not saying it SHOULD be that way,not saying color SHOULD be what determines usefulness, just that it would be. The larger breeders that register most of the animals and thereby keep the association afloat financially are by in large geared toward the show ring. The breed association couldn't exist with out them. That's why those people have so much power. The show industry carries that breed here in the US. I don't understand why some are so critical of it.
As far as buying from a "trusted" breeding program goes, their EPD's are not calculated from within their own herd. So why in the world would anyone think that the EPD's from a "trusted breeding program" would be any more accurate than those from any other program?
The concept of EPD's is wonderful. But due to the inaccuracy of reporting data , whether intentionally or not, they are not as reliable as they should be. It's a people problem not a mathematical one.
