Keeney`s Corner

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

Share | 
 

 no Leland, he`s just a bull

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
AuthorMessage
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:24 pm

Quote :
Maybe I choose a producer closer to home, although you are actually making my point over and over and DATA would prove that your cattle are superior in profit IF reproduction/fertility/longevity were in an index.
IF is a big word. IF there were indexes of everything, ... well it is the season to discuss Santa.

Quote :
Choosing a producer of your choice located just down the road from you, why should a commercial producer buy your bull vs his bull?

Probably boils down to a level of human trust. Same as Ford, Chevolet and Dodge. All the trucks have seats, steering wheels and paint. Some folks have their brand and that's the only brand there is. Why? Human nature more than data. But do you think that any and all commercial breeders have neither an idea who they want to buy a bull from nor why before they head down the road toward two farms that sell bulls?

If data is so important, why do most commercial buyers always want to buy the biggest bull in the pen?
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:45 pm

EddieM wrote:
Quote :
Maybe I choose a producer closer to home, although you are actually making my point over and over and DATA would prove that your cattle are superior in profit IF reproduction/fertility/longevity were in an index.
IF is a big word. IF there were indexes of everything, ... well it is the season to discuss Santa.

Quote :
Choosing a producer of your choice located just down the road from you, why should a commercial producer buy your bull vs his bull?

Probably boils down to a level of human trust. Same as Ford, Chevolet and Dodge. All the trucks have seats, steering wheels and paint. Some folks have their brand and that's the only brand there is. Why? Human nature more than data. But do you think that any and all commercial breeders have neither an idea who they want to buy a bull from nor why before they head down the road toward two farms that sell bulls?

If data is so important, why do most commercial buyers always want to buy the biggest bull in the pen?

My point is that given the right index, the producers who are not chasing growth and milk could find their bulls the best for other traits.

My next point is a producer may not have a choice (their first choice is out of bulls) and he is forced to go down the road to buy another. Is the bull he is buying at the second stop of the same genetic value as bulls from his first choice (who is sold out)? Ideally, a seedstock supplier would have a contract with commercial cattlemen to supply bulls at a given price. That would take out the risk of marketing costs and having too many or too few bulls.

The emotion of taking the biggest bull home is greater than the cold, hard facts.
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:57 pm

Bootheel wrote:
Here I sit, fruitlessly watching a dead horse being beat. All the while trying not to spew my wonderfully delicious, fresh from the mailbox, banana bread, all over my screen. If the horse was still alive, it would be futile, for me to hold down my food, as I hate to see horses beaten, but since it is dead, and wont get any deader, I think I have the stomach for it. My one year old son, is playing doctor at the moment, so I thouroughly examined the specimen with his stethoscope, to ensure it's deadness, and yep, it is dead.


All the while the beaters continue on.

The dead horse wants comparitive data from all the herds.

The beaters don't want to use all the bulls, from all the herds, to make meaningful, TIMELY, population genetic choices.

In order for the data to be meaningful, there must be enough randomized matings, to mean anything or have any accuracy.

Once again, time is the limiting factor an any meaningful index, for longevity, fertility, or stayability.


Bootheel, lifelong member of the deadhorse society

Matings have to be random if using ratios but not EPDs. EPDs account for the animals in the pedigree while ratios do not. For ratios to be really useful you would also have to have the same number of calves of the same sex by each bull from random matings to make the comparisons. Not true with EPDs.

Time is only a limiting factor in the short run (first 4 yrs) but not in the long run. Most of the opens occur when the 2-yr-old fails to breed back and the second greatest occur when the 3-yr-olds fail to breed back.

This is really the same as MK and LL wondering where we would be today if the industry had adapted Tru-line in the early 1980s when LL wrote about it. If the data had been collected, when AAA releases their Heifer Preg and STAY EPDs, LL and MK might be in the drivers seat. Instead there is the complaint about time. Very Happy It seems LL and MK aren't getting out of the business, so really the time issue is a non-issue. It is not like they are getting out before the data might be useful to selection of animals that excel in maternal traits and have the data to back it up.

I know everybody is pretty down on the universities (except when you agree with them, LOL), but I wonder what useful data will be collected and shared with customers to prove the animals are "good" Very Happy

Good discussions all around, I think.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:03 pm

Shoot the horse again and make sure it is dead this time Bootheel Laughing
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:12 pm

Time is only a limiting factor in the short run (first 4 yrs) but not in the long run. Most of the opens occur when the 2-yr-old fails to breed back and the second greatest occur when the 3-yr-olds fail to breed back.

oh my god, here we go again...worse than a jobs bill in Congress

This is really the same as MK and LL wondering where we would be today if the industry had adapted Tru-line in the early 1980s when LL wrote about it.
I don`t wonder about it; I understand fully why it did not happen but eventually might...

If the data had been collected, when AAA releases their Heifer Preg and STAY EPDs, LL and MK might be in the drivers seat.

oh bullshit; data doesn`t drive the registered industry...and if the data said the above about my cattle, i would disavow it...but I am in the driver`s seat of my operation...whose operation are the university "data/index darlings" in charge of...i can`t stay up with their financiers or lawsuits

Instead there is the complaint about time. It seems LL and MK aren't getting out of the business, so really the time issue is a non-issue.

no, the complaint would be the poor return on the investment of time...but I`m not complaining at all; just seizing the opportunity to what I see needs doing; not some university professor who makes his work revelent by accompaning it with a welfare check for doing it their way...

It is not like they are getting out before the data might be useful to selection of animals that excel in maternal traits and have the data to back it up.

clueless to everything that has been written in the Reflections topic...

I know everybody is pretty down on the universities (except when you agree with them, LOL), but I wonder what useful data will be collected and shared with customers to prove the animals are "good"

I never agree with universities; sometimes they agree with me...because they are after the fact analyzers...universities put numbers/data on paper of what someone else has done to attempt to prove satistically what insightful breeders usually already know...

Good discussions all around, I think.

both the dead horse and I disagree...a waste of time...but we gotta be somewhere...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 7:22 pm

Well, MK, it seems the two big selling points are the bulls are reasonably priced and you won't BS the buyer.

Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:08 pm

df wrote:
Bootheel wrote:
Here I sit, fruitlessly watching a dead horse being beat. All the while trying not to spew my wonderfully delicious, fresh from the mailbox, banana bread, all over my screen. If the horse was still alive, it would be futile, for me to hold down my food, as I hate to see horses beaten, but since it is dead, and wont get any deader, I think I have the stomach for it. My one year old son, is playing doctor at the moment, so I thouroughly examined the specimen with his stethoscope, to ensure it's deadness, and yep, it is dead.


All the while the beaters continue on.

The dead horse wants comparitive data from all the herds.

The beaters don't want to use all the bulls, from all the herds, to make meaningful, TIMELY, population genetic choices.

In order for the data to be meaningful, there must be enough randomized matings, to mean anything or have any accuracy.

Once again, time is the limiting factor an any meaningful index, for longevity, fertility, or stayability.


Bootheel, lifelong member of the deadhorse society

Matings have to be random if using ratios but not EPDs. EPDs account for the animals in the pedigree while ratios do not. For ratios to be really useful you would also have to have the same number of calves of the same sex by each bull from random matings to make the comparisons. Not true with EPDs.

My understanding of the Structured Carcass Evaluation, was that it was a randomized mating system, using proven sires, to prove the young sires comparitively. All of which was used to build EPD,s for carcass characteristics.



Time is only a limiting factor in the short run (first 4 yrs) but not in the long run. Most of the opens occur when the 2-yr-old fails to breed back and the second greatest occur when the 3-yr-olds fail to breed back.

My reference to ''time'' was the fact that those four year old cows, would usely be by a 6 year old bull, or older. Fine for selling semen, poor way to sell bulls and make any money.....assuming of course you want the data to have any accuraccy



Good discussions all around, I think.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:09 pm

df wrote:
Well, MK, it seems the two big selling points are the bulls are reasonably priced and you won't BS the buyer.

sometimes even cheaply priced...at days end, I haven`t discovered enough certifiable genetic derived commercial difference to get too excited about much data collection outside of understanding trait relationships...been there, done that, because it was the thing to do; and it left a lot undone and unknown...now I`ll do things my way for a while...funny thing about doing things wrong all these years; it has left me in position to continue to do things wrong if I please... Smile doing it all wrong and still in business; surely there`s something to be learned from that...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:36 pm

If the matings were to unknown cows, they should be random for the carcass eval.

Most of the data is from reg Angus so the random mating is not really important as the dam's pedigree is known.
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:39 pm

As alluded to before, breed improvement for some might be about stabilizing, and the old bulls may have a huge advantage over the young unproven bulls.
Back to top Go down
Chris B



Posts : 9
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Fortuna, MO

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:55 pm

Bootheel wrote:
Here I sit, fruitlessly watching a dead horse being beat. All the while trying not to spew my wonderfully delicious, fresh from the mailbox, banana bread, all over my screen. If the horse was still alive, it would be futile, for me to hold down my food, as I hate to see horses beaten, but since it is dead, and wont get any deader, I think I have the stomach for it. My one year old son, is playing doctor at the moment, so I thouroughly examined the specimen with his stethoscope, to ensure it's deadness, and yep, it is dead.


All the while the beaters continue on.

The dead horse wants comparitive data from all the herds.

The beaters don't want to use all the bulls, from all the herds, to make meaningful, TIMELY, population genetic choices.

In order for the data to be meaningful, there must be enough randomized matings, to mean anything or have any accuracy.

Once again, time is the limiting factor an any meaningful index, for longevity, fertility, or stayability.


Bootheel, lifelong member of the deadhorse society

Young Chuck moved to Montana and bought a horse from a farmer for $100.00. The farmer agreed to deliver the horse the next day. The next Day he drove up and said, "Sorry, Son, but I have some bad news, The horse died."

Chuck replied, "Well, then just give me my money back."

The farmer said, "Can't do that. I went and spent it already."

Chuck said, "Ok, then, just bring me the dead horse."

The farmer asked, "What ya gonna do with him?"

Chuck said, "I'm going to raffle him off."

The farmer said, "You can't raffle off a dead horse!"

Chuck said, "Sure I can. Watch me. I just won't tell anybody he's dead."

A month later, the farmer met up with Chuck and asked, "What happened With that dead horse?"

Chuck said, "I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars a Piece and made a net profit of $898.00."

The farmer said, "Didn't anyone complain?"

Chuck said, "Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two dollars back."

Chuck grew up and now works for the Angus Association
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Thu Dec 22, 2011 10:57 pm


Average birth weight via aaa 1972 69lbs 2010 79lbs

weaning weight 477 649



epd Bw -2.1 +1.8

ww -8 +46



Interesting that 3.7 lbs of birth epd equaled 10 actual pounds of birthweight.

While 54 lbs of epd made 172 lbs of actual weaning weight.



Hmmmmmm. My computations don't compute.


Bootheel, hoping df does a better job of making indexes


















Back to top Go down
Tom D
Admin


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

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:00 am

I met an old cowboy, I saw the look in his eyes. Something tells me he's been here before cause, experience makes you wise.

http://youtu.be/1lyjUTUBexg
Back to top Go down
jonken



Posts : 141
Join date : 2011-12-17
Location : nemo

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:18 am

[quote="df"]Even the swine industry and corn companies share data with their customers so the customers can make the best decision.
Is the data these companies share - We just sold to your neighbor or neighbors ?

Did the SALESMAN use this information for internal use only or did it just become a "sales tool"? Yes Jon
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 8:55 am

Bootheel wrote:

Average birth weight via aaa 1972 69lbs 2010 79lbs

weaning weight 477 649



epd Bw -2.1 +1.8

ww -8 +46



Interesting that 3.7 lbs of birth epd equaled 10 actual pounds of birthweight.

While 54 lbs of epd made 172 lbs of actual weaning weight.

Hmmmmmm. My computations don't compute.

Bootheel, hoping df does a better job of making indexes

Maybe management has changed in the last 40 years Very Happy
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:07 am

[quote="jonken"]
df wrote:
Even the swine industry and corn companies share data with their customers so the customers can make the best decision.
Is the data these companies share - We just sold to your neighbor or neighbors ?

Did the SALESMAN use this information for internal use only or did it just become a "sales tool"? Yes Jon

Isn't that the way it is with everything? The data is used to make a better product AND shared with the customer so show the difference (EPDifference) in the products on the market.
Back to top Go down
EddieM



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

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:22 am

Quote :
My point is that given the right index, the producers who are not chasing growth and milk could find their bulls the best for other traits.

Most around us buy commercial bulls for growth and buy in cows as needed. They think very little about replacement type traits. If they do retain heifers they get in a rush to find a calving ease bull because the heifers are loaded with BW from buying the biggest bull.

Quote :
My next point is a producer may not have a choice (their first choice is out of bulls) and he is forced to go down the road to buy another. Is the bull he is buying at the second stop of the same genetic value as bulls from his first choice (who is sold out)? Ideally, a seedstock supplier would have a contract with commercial cattlemen to supply bulls at a given price. That would take out the risk of marketing costs and having too many or too few bulls.

Another IF type point. Might want to start the paragraphs with these type warm and fuzzy thoughts with, "IF the world ran smoothly and everything was perfect ..." The end of the paragraph would wind down with, "... and they all lived happily eveer after."

Quote :
The emotion of taking the biggest bull home is greater than the cold, hard facts.

So, you then have concluded that facts, data, EPDs, ratios and anything else is at least secondary, if not lower in comparative values, to emotions in the general effort of commercial bull buying for the average road riding bull buyer. df, as you like to say, "you made my point"!
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:39 am

df wrote:
Bootheel wrote:

Average birth weight via aaa 1972 69lbs 2010 79lbs

weaning weight 477 649



epd Bw -2.1 +1.8

ww -8 +46



Interesting that 3.7 lbs of birth epd equaled 10 actual pounds of birthweight.

While 54 lbs of epd made 172 lbs of actual weaning weight.

Hmmmmmm. My computations don't compute.

Bootheel, hoping df does a better job of making indexes

Maybe management has changed in the last 40 years Very Happy


So management is three times as important as genetics. Good to know, but I would like a logical explanation on the reason why the numbers don't jive. We are talking about forty years of continual trend line. No gliches from an off year.


Bootheel, never always in an off year
Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 11:35 am

EddieM wrote:
Quote :
My point is that given the right index, the producers who are not chasing growth and milk could find their bulls the best for other traits.

Most around us buy commercial bulls for growth and buy in cows as needed. They think very little about replacement type traits. If they do retain heifers they get in a rush to find a calving ease bull because the heifers are loaded with BW from buying the biggest bull.

Quote :
My next point is a producer may not have a choice (their first choice is out of bulls) and he is forced to go down the road to buy another. Is the bull he is buying at the second stop of the same genetic value as bulls from his first choice (who is sold out)? Ideally, a seedstock supplier would have a contract with commercial cattlemen to supply bulls at a given price. That would take out the risk of marketing costs and having too many or too few bulls.

Another IF type point. Might want to start the paragraphs with these type warm and fuzzy thoughts with, "IF the world ran smoothly and everything was perfect ..." The end of the paragraph would wind down with, "... and they all lived happily eveer after."

Quote :
The emotion of taking the biggest bull home is greater than the cold, hard facts.

So, you then have concluded that facts, data, EPDs, ratios and anything else is at least secondary, if not lower in comparative values, to emotions in the general effort of commercial bull buying for the average road riding bull buyer. df, as you like to say, "you made my point"!



It doesn't mean genetics aren't important. It doesn't mean that bulls are not chosen on data. But you are correct, often emotion can be the primary factor in their decision.

It seems to me one of the reasons for seedstock producers not being concerned with the data is their buyers don't ask for it and don't understand it. Maybe the commercial cattlemen expects a minimum level of the traits they are looking for and are only concerned when the calves don't meet expections.

Back to top Go down
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 11:39 am

Bootheel wrote:
df wrote:
Bootheel wrote:

Average birth weight via aaa 1972 69lbs 2010 79lbs

weaning weight 477 649



epd Bw -2.1 +1.8

ww -8 +46



Interesting that 3.7 lbs of birth epd equaled 10 actual pounds of birthweight.

While 54 lbs of epd made 172 lbs of actual weaning weight.

Hmmmmmm. My computations don't compute.

Bootheel, hoping df does a better job of making indexes

Maybe management has changed in the last 40 years Very Happy


So management is three times as important as genetics. Good to know, but I would like a logical explanation on the reason why the numbers don't jive. We are talking about forty years of continual trend line. No gliches from an off year.


Bootheel, never always in an off year

I am not sure I understand the question. It is important to note EPDs deal with the difference between animals, not the absolute wts.

CSU did an experiment several years ago using genetics produced over a 30 year period (might have been longer). There was certainly a difference in the performance of those calves and reflected the difference in their EPDs.
Back to top Go down
Kent Powell



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

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 11:45 am

What EPD will show me how to produce more from less consistently and repeatably?
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 11:46 am

Would you rather sell bulls to a commercial producer who valued the data and understood the biology and was willing to pay for these compared to selling a bull to a commercial producer who made his selection on the peer pressure of his neighbors and which is the "mostest" fad of the day?
Back to top Go down
robert



Posts : 52
Join date : 2010-11-17
Age : 49
Location : oblivion, ny

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 11:59 am

df wrote:
Would you rather sell bulls to a commercial producer who valued the data and understood the biology and was willing to pay for these compared to selling a bull to a commercial producer who made his selection on the peer pressure of his neighbors and which is the "mostest" fad of the day?

neither, I sell bulls to people who trust me when I tell them what they can expect my bulls to deliver, based simply on the fact that I run my cows like they run theirs, maybe even a bit leaner.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4624
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 pm

gar sells a 1000 plus bulls a year with all the data they can muster, and keeps an interest in every bull....why?
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
df



Posts : 613
Join date : 2010-09-28

PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:59 pm

MKeeney wrote:
gar sells a 1000 plus bulls a year with all the data they can muster, and keeps an interest in every bull....why?

Because they are all so good? Smile

That should bring Bootheel back to the discussion!!!
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: no Leland, he`s just a bull   

Back to top Go down
 
no Leland, he`s just a bull
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 4 of 5Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Similar topics
-
» no Leland, he`s just a bull
» AGGRESSIVE BULL!!!
» black ragging bull
» Young bull pictures
» The Good, the Bad, the Ugly Bull Sale

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Keeney`s Corner :: farm and ranch life-
Jump to: