Angus Cattle

[rkaiser]

Searching for Perfect Angus Genetics

I was reading a couple of articles in a major beef publication this week about Angus cattle and was prompted to write a little piece myself. The last twenty or more years have seen a major shift in purebred genetics toward this breed which deserves praise and congratulations for taking the lead into the new realities of the cattle business in this country.

The articles I mention are somewhat polar in their views of Angus cattle however and reflect the variance in the breed that we all see at shows and sales around the country. One fellow speaks of a business approach to purebred sales using technology and economic strategy. He goes on to describe his choice of cattle to include characteristics like loose made - big ribbed - big boned - and lanky among others. A number of these terms could be perceived to be admirable to a British cattle breeder but could also be seen as following traits that we already have lots of in the Continental breeds in this country.

The other fellow focuses on hardiness and the low cost production side of our industry. He goes on to describe the size and efficiency of his cattle and goes so far as to say that his cattle handle a 30 per cent drop in body weight over the winter. He is talking about 350 pounds off a 1250 pound cow over the winter months. Now if this fellow is able to keep his conception rates at or near industry averages with this kind of management he deserves some credit but my goodness - what does this say for the genetic selection in his herd. Does he simply not put feed out for these animals? To me this sounds like a cow that cannot make it on a low quality ration if he is offering any volume of feed at all. The cows that would lose that kind of weight in my herd would be culled to make room for those who maintain on our low quality winter rations and carry that maintenance characteristic to their offspring.

I would say that this second fellow is more aware of where the industry is heading right now and is somewhat on the right track, but is a fair way off from calling his cattle the perfect Angus. In fact a fair way away from calling his cattle perfect in general. A goal that purebred breeders of all breeds hope to accomplish. It is nice to see different ideas in the Angus breed and awfully interesting to see almost all of the other purebred breeds looking at changes needed to keep ahead of the game. Adjustments are always being made within breeds and many breeders look to composite situations to make more drastic change.

I don’t know how many times I have been told by ranchers touring our herd that they have driven countless miles looking for Angus genetics like we have in our own herd. But our herd is not Angus. We do have two purebred breeds that are as pure as Angus, as black as Angus, and I believe as good as Angus. But due to the simple fact that they are not Angus they do not receive near the attention that they deserve.

I am not going to even mention the breeds of cattle that we work with as this is not an advertisement as much as a wake up call to an industry hung up on putting all of it’s eggs in one basket, and then trying to change those eggs to suit every customers needs.

Good luck all

Randy Kaiser

[grassfarmer]

I read the same two articles Randy and I guess I'm slightly less tactful in my thoughts on them.
The first you mention who is proud of his big boned, lanky cattle is a purebred breeder removed from the reality of the cattle industry his customers survive in. I would never use lanky as a positive word to describe beef cattle - by implication it means poor beef cattle in my mind.
I received a dispersal catalogue from a different breed recently which showed plenty of lanky, plain cows. It also showed the foundation cow they started from 30 years ago - a european import. What was sad to see was they had turned a thick, fleshy moderate sized female into a herd of virtual Holsteins. So much for a lifetimes work in purebreds. Again a purebred breeder divorced from the realities of the marketplace.

On the other hand you mention the Angus that are pushed hard enough to lose 30% of their weight over winter. This is in the high country of New Zealand, a very different terrain from Canada. I really believe in this type of selection - this is the way we are heading with our own herd, push them hard and eliminate the cows that can't make it on less feed. You will finish up with truly efficient animals. The only point I would make is that after I have done this for 20 years I will have cattle adapted to my system and my farm. The same with the NZ cattle - how they adjust to Canadian soils, climate etc remains to be seen. They would be a safe bet to use as a terminal cross but I suspect that they may have genetic potential to grow far too big on the mineral rich prairie soils if breeding stock are retained off them. Because of their tough upbringing they are probably so efficient that a move to better conditions may give them a boost similar to an injection of hybrid vigor - and that would most likely be expressed in size first. However in comparing the two systems mentioned I back the latter every time - these may be the cattle "for a new generation", the ones that will allow us to compete with low cost imports. The traditional hot house way of rearing purebreds must be headed for the museum in the current climate. It'll probably take another human generation though before the infrastructure of the conventional purebred industry is adapted to suit the needs of todays commercial breeders.

[rkaiser]

As for the tact part grassfarmer - I wrote this as a letter to the editor and sent it out to a bunch publications.

I guess thinking of potential sales LOL.

Once in a while tact comes in to play when we are promoting.

Thanks for the thoughts however and as usual grasfarmer - mostly agreement from this Microsoft sword wielder.

[PureCountry]

I recall Elgar Grinde stating at last year's Galloway Cattleman's Day, that his definition of Net Feed Efficiency is feeding 4 cows so little that 3 of them die through the winter. The one that survives is the one to breed on with.

A little drastic yes, but only because we have this "humane" perception that we can't let an animal in our care die. When you stop and look at the bigger picture though, meaning beyond our "humane" views, mercy(or a lack thereof) on the part of Mother Nature is exactly what resulted in the most efficient grazing animals on the North American continent. Namely, the deer, antelope, bison, moose, elk, sheep and goats. Varying conditions in varying terrain shaped and moulded these animals into the species we have come to categorize them as.

If we were to use the same cold, merciless yardstick to select our strong and condemn our weak beef animals, would we make advancements in genetics any quicker? Or would it be kept at a checked rate due to numbers of animals culled? Something to ponder for you 2 Microsoft Swordsmen.

[rkaiser]

I guess one consideration would be if a person is renting the experimental rats or renting them out. :-)

You're scaring me bud. I know you live close to Elgar...............

[gaucho]

Grass Farmer I do not know where you get your theory that the cattle will get bigger....perhaps they may just finish quicker because of the tough selection pressure that has been put on the cattle for the length of that breeders program. Harvesting body condition that cows put on in the summer and fall should be a part of every winter ration/winter feeding program. If your cows do not loose condition over the winter months then you are not pushing the limits Mr. Kaiser, which may say somthing about your breeding program. Purebred breeders should be running their cow herds under tougher conditions than their commercial breeders....unfortunately most run them under 5 star hotel enviornments. Did you also read that the bulls come with a 4 year guarantee for feet and legs....is there anybody in Canada doing this?

[rkaiser]

30% loss in weight is pushing the limits gaucho, but is also showing the animal is genetically incapable of using low quality forage to maintain itself. Like grassfarmer - I am still grazing and will be for about another month. My calves are still on the cows and it is - 20 degrees outside. After we are done grazing we will move the cows in to a bale grazing situation. Mixed alfalfa grass hay - nothing special and rationed to a per cent of body weight. Some picking on the carry over ground that the bales are placed on. If this system is 5 star hotel - I guess that would be your call.

I was trying to point out the genetic potential to use low quality forage has been overlooked by the fellow losing 300 pounds on a 1250 pound cow.
Challenging cows more that I do is each persons perogative.I personally believe that we were the ones who put the fences around these beasts and thus took on the responsibility of at least offering a similar diet as the deer and moose that purecountry speaks of that would be available and sought should the fence be removed.

[smcgrath76]

Interesting thread here. I am not sure I believe that the bison, etc. are the most efficient foragers out there in terms of meat production. In terms of maintenance, probably they are.
For example, bison do not produce the same quantity of end product, as quickly as a beef animal. Efficiency of maintenance and efficiency of gain are two distinct but important differences. Do I think there are inefficient beef animals, for sure. That includes maintenance and gain inefficiency.
Losing 30% of body condition over the winter may be fine, or not. For ourselves, cows are on grass right now and our feed tests show we are pretty safe and shouldn't lose much body condition for another month or even two. I think the focus is off here though.
The question is, based on the production system, what is the most profitable can I be? If I determined I can make more money by gaining 200 pounds on my cows over winter, I will do that too.
There are only two kinds of cows in the world. Those that make money and those that lose it. I suspect heifers born last year, this year and maybe next will make more money than those born 5 years ago.
We don't have a picture perfect cow herd, because we have some ugly cows that make money and keep getting pregnant. At its' basest level the cow/calf/sell at weaning thing is really all about low cost pregnancy and calf survival.

[grassfarmer]

Gaucho, You misunderstand my point on size - I expect the cattle we are talking about will produce an excellent slaughter generation of cattle, which may mature earlier rather than grow bigger. The point I was making was on adaption, to different climate, different soil, different feeds etc. They look like great cattle but they are cattle that are adapted to a NZ climate, soil, grasses not Alberta ones. I will be interested to see if your first generation of embryo calves retained for cows mature heavier than their dams. I suppose it's a pretty simple equation - how much of mature size and weight is genetic and how much is feed based?
I tend to agree with you on harvesting body condition for winter food, it's what our program has always been based on. I don't think some of the prairie boys appreciate the toughness of a mild, wet, windy climate or the low quality of grass/forbs that tend to grow under these conditions. Cows in western Canada have a real easy climate, -40C is nothing, that's why they have a hair coat.
Cattle selected as you describe in a tough, wet climate are not inefficient convertors of low quality forages by any means, I suspect they will be super efficient convertors. If they are pushed tough enough to lose 30% over winter and still re-breed that is a management decision not a reflection on their genetic merit.
Again with the adaption thing you need to be real careful because pushing cows here to drop 30% over winter may not necessarily work exactly like it does in NZ. Dropping 26% may work fine - dropping 30% may result in a wreck with 40% open cows. It's a fine dividing line there and one that has huge financial implications if you get it wrong.

[rkaiser]

Nice to see a mix of philosophical and economic comments as we can not deny the importance of each.

Just came back from chores this morning which amounted to opening a gate for the next grazing paddock and could not help but notice the mouthfuls of reed canary and quack grass in our old girls mouths. Brought this topic of grazing back in to mind and how simple of complex we all want to make it --- I guess depending somewhat on our aspirations to become paid consultants (wink) or just to find the best way on our own ranch.

These cows with the mouthfuls of reed canary grass were more than happy to find some Alfalfa, fescue, clover and other grass varieties when I opened the gate. A lot like the bison would have been happy when their winter migration moved into a field of similar quality.

The whole point of paddock grazing is to encourage healthy soil and in turn a healthy mix of grass and legume forages. Then to manage the grazing of these paddocks as to encourage the cattle to not be overly chosy and eat most of the menu set out in front of them at the same time. And then move on.

Just like us, and simply put just like any other animal when given a choice. I can not say that those old girls of mine were not harvesting a bit of body condition the last few days as I forced them to eat lesser quality to save a few bucks but I know that I will put the skids on the loss today with choice on their menu.

As far as the guaranteed bulls mentioned in one of the posts, I don't know if I am ready to guarantee however we have been working on a bull development program ourselves that I am quite sure will enhance the genetic potential of our bulls feet and legs. Our bull calves are weaned and fed only good quality grass hay for their first winter and then introduced to an abundance of good quality grass for the summer. Our diet this winter consists of some good quality hay and barley silage. No grain or additional supplements.

If offering these bulls Good Quality over the diet offered to these cows that lose 30% of their body weight does not allow me to guarantee my bulls feet - I guess my buyers will be the judge.

My point is that challenging cattle and trying to compete with the TV reality show "The Biggest loser" are two different things. And genetic selection can certainly affect the ability of that biggest loser to maintain herself on a lesser quality winter ration which we cannot deny as our biggest challenge to year round feeding here in Canuckleduckleland.