Keeney`s Corner

A current and reflective discussion of cattle breeding from outside the registered mainstream
 
HomeUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Fat Boy ????

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
AuthorMessage
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:31 am

Megan,
my quick evaluation...you are neither maternal or terminal; but lukewarm; in the middle;...many breeders are middle; tis safe ground...more are terminal; with an eye to; or pretending to be maternal...virtually none are maternal...tis a traditional carry over from breed association competition rather than breed co-operation and complementarity for the ultimate benefit of commercial production...the bureaucracy must be served first...
no need for fire and ice matings to ever change a herd; only what`s on your plate Smile

Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Thu Oct 23, 2014 8:24 am

terminal Very Happy



Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
pukerimu



Posts : 246
Join date : 2012-06-02
Location : Norsewood, New Zealand

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Thu Oct 23, 2014 4:37 pm

MKeeney wrote:
terminal  Very Happy




ABONIMATION don't you mean - what were they thinking???? NZ never went the belt buckle way although for many years the Angus were smaller and dumpy (much like the ones that came off the boat from Scotland in 1843) and this was favourable as they were called "chiller beasts" ie a whole carcase was sent to Mother England in the hold of ships - the cattle got bigger in the 70's and 80's with the introduction of the likes of PD Big Sky but never went to the extremes that you saw in the States due to the cows being smaller frames and most of the crosses being first - before the majority of registered cows became to extreme (some did of course) the problems associated with extreme frame size and non fleshing became apparent - bearing in mind that the majority of registered breeders in NZ were large herds farming in the same conditions as their commercial cattleman neighbours and the damage was moderated accordingly.

Now I am not sure Mike whether we are in the middle or not - our breeding philosophies are based on breeding cows that climb to the top of the hill, go looking for the grass wherever it may be, get in calf early, calf unassisted and rear a calf which is as good if not better than anything else managed (they are all judged against each other), stay walking on four good feet, maintain a tidy udder and when they get pinched on feed, recover quickly and look like they have never been on anything but the best paddock all year. Seemingly from our attempts to breed heifers from cows like that, which then go on to do the same as their mother, the bull calves seem to do okay too ................ and not only for us Smile

This has been the programme for two decades now and our meticulous record keeping is not to tick boxes for our breed association but so when we have all the cows in the yards at any one time we know exactly who is doing and who is not (the feet, the udder and the condition are easily seen on the individual)
Back to top Go down
http://www.mtmableangus.co.nz
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Thu Oct 23, 2014 8:33 pm

Megan, I looked at my weaned calf crop today and thought of this maternal/terminal division...Mine are purposefully not as uniform as your cattle; but I see all the types as being between...if they don`t die; they all get eat; so maybe all cattle are terminal Very Happy and like the wheat, there may be pragmatic limitations to just how fertile/maternal one can afford to be...only the salesmen and politicians attempt to make us unhappy in our circumstance; I`ve little time for either...

Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Thu Oct 23, 2014 8:49 pm

on second glance

meticulous record keeping

if it`s that meticulous to find the problem, why bother Question ...because the genes aren`t that damn meticulous when they segregate; in fact, random Exclamation

it is so liberating for me to no longer feel any need whatsoever to be meticulous...I think that is surely a sign of cattle breeding accomplishment rather than just not giving a damn anymore Cool  ; I remember one year asking Larry what those two older bulls were standing in the bull pen...
aww hell, we sent 14 {of 200} unsold, culled by our customers,  bulls to the yards...told MikeL to pick out two to keep around in case we needed them Smile Smile Smile
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Tom D
Admin


Posts : 535
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 38
Location : Michigan

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:07 pm

Words never listen and teachers, oh, they never learn.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



Posts : 895
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 7:58 am

MKeeney wrote:
on second glance

meticulous record keeping

if it`s that meticulous to find the problem, why bother Question ...because the genes aren`t that damn meticulous when they segregate; in fact, random Exclamation

it is so liberating for me to no longer feel any need whatsoever to be meticulous...I think that is surely a sign of cattle breeding accomplishment rather than just not giving a damn anymore Cool  ; I remember one year asking Larry what those two older bulls were standing in the bull pen...
aww hell, we sent 14 {of 200} unsold, culled by our customers,  bulls to the yards...told MikeL to pick out two to keep around in case we needed them Smile Smile Smile

Would you need any records to improve fertility, to know to pound out a particular bull, to know which bull to use again or to save sons and daughters? I do, especially on any good that selection for fertility might do.

If the herd is meeting a time of breeding combined with an acceptable % bred cows is that the line in the sand to declare "maternal status" due to environmental fit? Surely a maternal herd does not have to produce inferior bulls or steers to maintain the name.

I always felt that one of LL's greatest strengths was his memory to visualize ancestors. Somehow he knew the background, either from memory or records. The extreme visualization is something I cannot do and was a greatly admired ability. Maybe my substitute is records and a few pictures.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:02 pm

EddieM wrote:
MKeeney wrote:
on second glance

meticulous record keeping

if it`s that meticulous to find the problem, why bother Question ...because the genes aren`t that damn meticulous when they segregate; in fact, random Exclamation

it is so liberating for me to no longer feel any need whatsoever to be meticulous...I think that is surely a sign of cattle breeding accomplishment rather than just not giving a damn anymore Cool  ; I remember one year asking Larry what those two older bulls were standing in the bull pen...
aww hell, we sent 14 {of 200} unsold, culled by our customers,  bulls to the yards...told MikeL to pick out two to keep around in case we needed them Smile Smile Smile

Would you need any records to improve fertility, to know to pound out a particular bull, to know which bull to use again or to save sons and daughters?  I do, especially on any good that selection for fertility might do.

If the herd is meeting a time of breeding combined with an acceptable % bred cows is that the line in the sand to declare "maternal status" due to environmental fit?  Surely a maternal herd does not have to produce inferior bulls or steers to maintain the name.

I always felt that one of LL's greatest strengths was his memory to visualize ancestors.  Somehow he knew the background, either from memory or records.  The extreme visualization is something I cannot do and was a greatly admired ability.  Maybe my substitute is records and a few pictures.

Larry`s favorite quote...

Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.

Charles Mingus


the above was not Larry`s lifelong perspective; only arriving at this most creative stage in the last 15 years or less; ...I fully expect a few young breeders to take Larry`s teachings and his approach and move past what Larry accomplished; just as Larry took Lingle and Wye`s experiences and moved past Wye...that`s progress rather than change...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:15 pm

all good questions Eddie...my perspective; which has value to only me Smile

Would you need any records to improve fertility,

what would the records be; a piece of promotional junk like the pathfinder report? Heifer pregnancy from AAA when whole herd reporting is not required? the joke of dna profiles? all this data; all the big registered herd talk; and the calf crop percentage in the US...I`m prepared to shorten the breeding season; and I really doubt that changing the long range fertility any significant amount..

to know to pound out a particular bull,

why don`t we just pound them all at three? if they`re good enough; there will be a son in the un-identified retained mob from a good identified{by selected type} cow...

to know which bull to use again

see above

or to save sons and daughters?

we probably need to calve all the daughters of all the bulls to see if our percentage of acceptable females is improving yearly......eliminate the ones that don`t suit on first calf production...

I do, especially on any good that selection for fertility might do.

give us more detail...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:38 pm

more points

if one has memory problems, the first step in minimize how much you must remember...

1. write down the characteristics you wish to select for; if you run out of paper; limit your criteria to what makes the best cow OR what makes the best feeder/feedlot/carcass steer; but never both, because you`ll end up improving either very little...
Falloon`s rule of squaring the number of traits selected for equals the rate of progress in each is mathematically undeniable...

and of course, use natural selection... Smile

Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Mark Day



Posts : 238
Join date : 2010-09-24
Age : 51
Location : Russellville, Ohio

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:56 pm

Eddie,
Glad I am not the only one that needs a few records to keep things straight.
Back to top Go down
Tom D
Admin


Posts : 535
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 38
Location : Michigan

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:33 pm

I spent most of the day loafing around with the cows, and I forgot to write anything down. Damn, all that time wasted.
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 845
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Fri Oct 24, 2014 11:29 pm

On the visualizing ancestors thing I want to rerun a post that I made in 2010. Denis's quotes in here are wall hangers for me.

"I may be a luddite in my appreciation of "technology/science/EPDs" in the breeding of cattle but I tend to agree with some of the old boys. Denis Cadzow one of the founders of the Luing breed, born in 1916, spoke with admiration of the education he got from his father " Of his expertise in stockmanship, he had no peer, and his ability to know stock and evaluate them gave his sons a wonderful example to follow. Natural stockmanship such as his truly makes the modern system of attaching figures and indexes to livestock performance appear an unwarranted caper"

As "performance testing" became more popular Denis was quoted again in 1967 as saying "Many of our beef breeds have been performance testing for more than 100 years now. The names in a pedigree can bring to most breeders a mental picture of the animal - he or she was either big or small, bad feet or good ones, good or bad legs, and difficult animals to fatten, or heifers by that bull were bad to calve and so on - a visual memory of every detail. That was performance testing - real stockmanship - something that has been handed down in some families for generations and must not be lost in this computer age. That is what a pedigree is meant for. It is what made British stock what it is today and whatever happens in the future with figures and data it cannot be said that it failed in the past"
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
pukerimu



Posts : 246
Join date : 2012-06-02
Location : Norsewood, New Zealand

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:46 am

We spent most of the day building a lamb docking pen and "dive" proofing the fences leading up to it - our record keeping is an excel spread sheet - has everything we need to know about everyone - keep the weights in a separate book and between the two points of reference get a pretty good handle on what every cow and her daughters are doing on the place and which bulls do and which do not.

I can't see the point of keeping pedigrees and making breeding decisions with our cattle if the end result is not quantifiable (and do not get me wrong I am not referring to indexes, numbers or "performance data" generated by a third party here but actual tangible calving, weaning etc) results cannot be identified and noted for future reference against either the individual on an annual basis or against peers and relatives. We have thousands of ewes but know which rams went to which mob and although the record keeping is not on the same par as for the cattle believe you me we would soon be able to tell which rams were not worth feeding for another year - the dogs appreciate our being able to make culling decisions - there were three rams put in the dog tucker freezer last week - without knowing what the bulls and cows are doing then how do you determine who "is dog tucker" and who is worth feeding for another year too? The larger the mobs the more important to take a note when something is noteworthy - not a chance of remembering it next time they are in the yards - which happens here at magnesium blousing, calf tagging (on an individual basis) and weaning and that is it for the cows as far as up close and personal goes - for the rest of the time they are out and about unless they were taken off at any one of those instances to go to the works.
Back to top Go down
http://www.mtmableangus.co.nz
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 5:57 am

Mark Day wrote:
Eddie,
Glad I am not the only one that needs a few records to keep things straight.

Mark,
what records caused you to sell me the best two year old heifer in my pasture this fall; I`m pretty sure what you kept aren`t all as good; and none could be better; she`s perfect Smile ...oh, while you`re at it; take your records and tell me her number Smile


Last edited by MKeeney on Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:16 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:15 am

Tom D wrote:
I spent most of the day loafing around with the cows, and I forgot to write anything down. Damn, all that time wasted.

A man who dares to waste one hour of time has not discovered the value of life.

Charles Darwin

did you plan any future matings? I saw Shelby at the golf course and was reminded of long past matings...I would suggest neither of our day`s were a waste  Smile

edited for disclaimer...Shelby, as in...not Ronnie Smile


Last edited by MKeeney on Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:34 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:19 am

Grassfarmer wrote:
On the visualizing ancestors thing I want to rerun a post that I made in 2010. Denis's quotes in here are wall hangers for me.

"I may be a luddite in my appreciation of "technology/science/EPDs" in the breeding of cattle but I tend to agree with some of the old boys. Denis Cadzow one of the founders of the Luing breed, born in 1916, spoke with admiration of the education he got from his father " Of his expertise in stockmanship, he had no peer, and his ability to know stock and evaluate them gave his sons a wonderful example to follow. Natural stockmanship such as his truly makes the modern system of attaching figures and indexes to livestock performance appear an unwarranted caper"

As "performance testing" became more popular Denis was quoted again in 1967 as saying "Many of our beef breeds have been performance testing for more than 100 years now. The names in a pedigree can bring to most breeders a mental picture of the animal - he or she was either big or small, bad feet or good ones, good or bad legs, and difficult animals to fatten, or heifers by that bull were bad to calve and so on - a visual memory of every detail. That was performance testing - real stockmanship - something that has been handed down in some families for generations and must not be lost in this computer age. That is what a pedigree is meant for. It is what made British stock what it is today and whatever happens in the future with figures and data it cannot be said that it failed in the past"

I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term of Natural Selection.

Charles Darwin



Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:32 am

pukerimu wrote:
We spent most of the day building a lamb docking pen and "dive" proofing the fences leading up to it - our record keeping is an excel spread sheet - has everything we need to know about everyone - keep the weights in a separate book and between the two points of reference get a pretty good handle on what every cow and her daughters are doing on the place and which bulls do and which do not.

I can't see the point of keeping pedigrees and making breeding decisions with our cattle if the end result is not quantifiable (and do not get me wrong I am not referring to indexes, numbers or "performance data" generated by a third party here but actual tangible calving, weaning etc) results cannot be identified and noted for future reference against either the individual on an annual basis or against peers and relatives.  We have thousands of ewes but know which rams went to which mob and although the record keeping is not on the same par as for the cattle believe you me we would soon be able to tell which rams were not worth feeding for another year - the dogs appreciate our being able to make culling decisions - there were three rams put in the dog tucker freezer last week - without knowing what the bulls and cows are doing then how do you determine who "is dog tucker" and who is worth feeding for another year too?  The larger the mobs the more important to take a note when something is noteworthy - not a chance of remembering it next time they are in the yards - which happens here at magnesium blousing, calf tagging (on an individual basis) and weaning and that is it for the cows as far as up close and personal goes - for the rest of the time they are out and about unless they were taken off at any one of those instances to go to the works.


I can't see the point of keeping pedigrees and making breeding decisions with our cattle if the end result is not quantifiable

where do you write down what each individual ate and therefore what it`s cost is...compared to it`s benefit? without such, all individual records are half-assed...

we would soon be able to tell which rams were not worth feeding for another year

this seems very incriminating of your system...why didn`t "meticulous records" prevent their use in the first place? all these records don`t seem to translate into projected breeding value...of which epds and indexes are an attempt to do...imperfect, but still better....but still only measuring production; not cost...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



Posts : 895
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:35 am

MKeeney wrote:
all good questions Eddie...my perspective; which has value to only me Smile

Would you need any records to improve fertility,

In herd data is the best for environmental issues.  How about ancestors, age, birthdates, I like to know birth weights, and since they sell by the pound I like to know WWs.  There is a difference as you have your herd in a bubble and I have not chewed that much bubblegum yet. Laughing

what would the records be; a piece of promotional junk like the pathfinder report? Heifer pregnancy from AAA when whole herd reporting is not required? the joke of dna profiles? all this data; all the big registered herd talk; and the calf crop percentage in the US...I`m prepared to shorten the breeding season; and I really doubt that changing the long range fertility any significant amount..

to know to pound out a particular bull,

why don`t we just pound them all at three? if they`re good enough; there will be a son in the un-identified retained mob from a good identified{by selected type} cow...
Sounds noble but if I have never seen that to be practical.

to know which bull to use again

see above

or to save sons and daughters?

we probably need to calve all the daughters of all the bulls to see if our percentage of acceptable females is improving yearly......eliminate the ones that don`t suit on first calf production...

Then you never know if the cows develop problems with age before you cull the bulls, save sons of all and mix the mess in the entire herd?
I do, especially on any good that selection for fertility might do.

give us more detail...

MK wrote:
this seems very incriminating of your system...why didn`t "meticulous records" prevent their use in the first place? all these records don`t seem to translate into projected breeding value...of which epds and indexes are an attempt to do...imperfect, but still better....but still only measuring production; not cost...

I thought that we knew about the randomness of genes.  You need to observe your sheep a bit more.  There are some twins that exhibit huge differences, much less half sibs.
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 845
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:23 am

Pukerimu, when culling cows that turn in a smaller calf how do you prevent selecting against longevity?
I believe high weaning weight is antagonistic to longevity.
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
pukerimu



Posts : 246
Join date : 2012-06-02
Location : Norsewood, New Zealand

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sat Oct 25, 2014 4:45 pm

eeney
I can't see the point of keeping pedigrees and making breeding decisions with our cattle if the end result is not quantifiable

where do you write down what each individual ate and therefore what it`s cost is...compared to it`s benefit? without such, all individual records are half-assed...

we would soon be able to tell which rams were not worth feeding for another year

this seems very incriminating of your system...why didn`t "meticulous records" prevent their use in the first place? all these records don`t seem to translate into projected breeding value...of which epds and indexes are an attempt to do...imperfect, but still better....but still only measuring production; not cost...[/quote]

We let others turn themselves inside out on SIL (Sheep Improvement L (something)) a ram is a just a sheep shagger to us (perhaps just me) - one job - get the ewes in lamb - where we can tell the difference for instance is if a number of south suffolks and southdowns went out with the 4 year olds and most of the lambs coming down the docking chute are southdown - the decision to raddle mark the limping suffolks and put them in the killer paddock when they were taken away from the ewes proved to be the right decision - likewise when the white faces are done - we will be able to tell who did the most work - the romdales or the open faced perendales.  The rams generally tell the story by their condition as to who worked the hardest when they are brought in.  We are not emotionally involved with our sheep (well I most certainly am not) they are the most ungrateful creatures which are hugely inventive at finding new and more bizarre ways to kill themselves and whenever they are in close confines with me they ram, jump into and generally bash me.  Actually loathing would be a good description of my relationship with sheep.  Sadly for me we have over 3000 ewes - can't live with them - can't live without them  Twisted Evil .  Happiness for me is to see the lambs go on a truck to either works or sale yards - our finishing season is short here so many lambs are sold in store condition in the yards - they seem to go really well when they get onto low warm country and we have repeat buyers competing for them in the sale yards.

As for the cows - they are all given the same access to the same grass with subtle, and always taken into account differences ie one mob maybe pinched more than another and hemmed in by other stock not allowing for a shift - this is all perhaps not "meticulously recorded" but observed and weighed in any mental calculations and judgements made at a later date.

As I have said to Mike - as much as we would love to come visit and see how things are done over there we have two at boarding school still  affraid if any are intrepid travellers, and wish to come to the bottom of the world we'd enjoy seeing you in a totally non creepy stalkerish kind of way  Very Happy .

Grassfarmer - I would agree with you - we do not have any really high milk cows (over half our herd is +7 or below - the NZ/Aus av is +13) and have culled for years on condition (cow) at weaning and udders so the herd is pretty much self replacing with cows that milk to their environment.  In any event we'd rarely cull on one calf - a note is taken to watch what happens next year and the calf is watched also - if it then grows like a weed and meets our expectations on it's own merit (and the cow is easy fleshing and easy keeping herself) then a lighter weaning weight is not an issue - if a cow consistently returns a smaller calf which does not settle itself to average or better and neither makes it into the herd or even consideration for a sale bull then she may well be a good fertile cow but she is not a good fertile cow for us and therefore she will go to make room for one who's family performance would indicate she has what it takes - admittedly the culls have all had the same hopeful introduction into the herd but as has been pointed out on numerous occasions on this board .......... the desired genes sometimes will not come out  Sad .  We have noticed over time though that a cow that milks less can make her daughters even less milky - of course a cow with consistently low weaning weights can also just be an incredibly indifferent mother or have an udder not firing on all fours - all noted accordingly and cull-able offences.
Back to top Go down
http://www.mtmableangus.co.nz
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:15 am

Eddie,
I`ve not only chewed but swallowed enough registered BS in my life to have an allergic reaction anytime I`m too close to it. The entire registered tradition is built on a long standing, created fallacy that cattle "with papers" are superior. It is that fear of the cost of losing that false value when selling that keeps most people registering stock; the association bureaucrats even know papers are over-valued selection tools; that`s why they keep passing rules that "require registration papers" to participate in such as grazing associations or cattle welfare programs in KY and other welfare states. You degraded penhookers in a recent post; I hold them in higher esteem than most registered breeders; for the successful penhooker must know the true value of cattle.
If ones memory is so poor that he must meticulously record everything; chances are good that the brain will be incapable of analyzing the recorded data anyway...these personal deficiencies are why I`m limiting my selection data to what stands in front of me; maternally speaking, the calf and his mother...the calf`s sire would have been chosen the same way; not out of a picture book with numbers.
It has been well chronicled here in Reflections from LL the disappointments of old cows with great lifetime records to reproduce themselves; or to produce sons that make good daughters. Your twin example is great as well; exact same meticulous records; vastly different results; then why the hell all the records that produce both success and failure from the same set of records? I read all these "learned so much from Larry" quotes etc; but I see precious little action based on that "learning"...same old sell first; breed later...
to be continued... while I wait on Mark with the "why" and "who is" this outstanding heifer I bought from him Very Happy
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Kent Powell



Posts : 606
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:10 am

"We have noticed over time though that a cow that milks less can make her daughters even less milky - of course a cow with consistently low weaning weights can also just be an incredibly indifferent mother or have an udder not firing on all fours - all noted accordingly and cull-able offences."

My experience parallels what I have read and heard from several others.  The great milking cows seldom have daughters who produce as well as themselves, but those lesser producing daughters tend to produce high production daughters once again. Skipping a generation.  Once again a favoring of those revolving around the average.  I have noticed this over and over.   Anything is cullable, but since I am interested in the genetics not the environmental reactions, I am not too quick to judge terminating a lifetime of breeding that I may not be smart enough to understand yet.


Last edited by Kent Powell on Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
Grassfarmer



Posts : 845
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sun Oct 26, 2014 1:52 pm

Kent Powell wrote:
"We have noticed over time though that a cow that milks less can make her daughters even less milky - of course a cow with consistently low weaning weights can also just be an incredibly indifferent mother or have an udder not firing on all fours - all noted accordingly and cull-able offences."

My experience parallels that I have read and heard from several others.  The great milking cows seldom have daughters who produce as well as themselves, but those lesser producing daughters tend to produce high production daughters once again. Skipping a generation.  Once again a favoring of those revolving around the average.  I have noticed this over and over.   Anything is cullable, but since I am interested in the genetics not the environmental reactions, I am not too quick to judge terminating a lifetime of breeding that I may not be smart enough to understand yet.  


Kent, I agree with your great milkers producing daughters with less and then the generation skipping restoring that.  I think that's down to the over fat heifer calf laying down fat in it's udder - hence environmental rather than genetic. But isn't that contradictory to pukerimu's statement that "a cow that milks less can make her daughters even less milky" ? Where could the genetics for milk production disappear to in a closed herd situation?
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4596
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:56 pm

Grassfarmer wrote:
Kent Powell wrote:
"We have noticed over time though that a cow that milks less can make her daughters even less milky - of course a cow with consistently low weaning weights can also just be an incredibly indifferent mother or have an udder not firing on all fours - all noted accordingly and cull-able offences."

My experience parallels that I have read and heard from several others.  The great milking cows seldom have daughters who produce as well as themselves, but those lesser producing daughters tend to produce high production daughters once again. Skipping a generation.  Once again a favoring of those revolving around the average.  I have noticed this over and over.   Anything is cullable, but since I am interested in the genetics not the environmental reactions, I am not too quick to judge terminating a lifetime of breeding that I may not be smart enough to understand yet.  


Kent, I agree with your great milkers producing daughters with less and then the generation skipping restoring that.  I think that's down to the over fat heifer calf laying down fat in it's udder - hence environmental rather than genetic. But isn't that contradictory to pukerimu's statement that "a cow that milks less can make her daughters even less milky" ? Where could the genetics for milk production disappear to in a closed herd situation?

through selection for....growth?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Fat Boy ????   

Back to top Go down
 
Fat Boy ????
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 6 of 10Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Keeney`s Corner :: Advertise :: For Sale-
Jump to: