bass ackwards heterosis...

[smcgrath76]

This probably has more to do with the big cow/little cow discussion.
Everyone does their own thing, and if you are still in business then it is the right thing for you.
I see a lot of big cows, bred to little bulls to produce the feeder cattle mentioned in the discussion posted earlier. For example, some guys breed 1800 pound CH cows to Red Angus bulls to produce tan british x continental feeders.
This to me is bass ackwards. The same producer could (should?) be using "little" 1200-1500 pound Red Angus cows bred to 1 big bull to produce the same calves.
Thoughts? Discussion? Did I piss anybody off?

[smcgrath76]

Just a note, the breeds and weight ranges used were for example only. I don't think this is a breed specific debate and I certainly don't want to discriminate against some of the 1800 pound plus british based cows out there. I don't think they have a place in the commercial cowherd either.

[intr3est]

Sean, your post is the way it should be done for efficiency etc. I think most times the concern is CE. I'd even go further and say that the cow should be a F1 of two maternal breeds and have a terminal breed coming in behind. The problem is finding enough good F1's.

[farmers_son]

The first thing that comes to mind breeding very big cows to small bulls is a physical problem with breeding although the bulls are generally willing to give it their best effort. Extremes should always be avoided.

Shouldn't the decision of which cow is best for your herd be based on some criteria other than cow weight? Like pounds of live calf produced per acre or net $ per acre perhaps measured against a benchmark that is comparable to your own farm? Big cow, little cow, I have seen both and both can be productive or expensive, depends upon the cow. I question ratios like pounds of calf weaned / weight of cow.

I acknowledge that it is difficult to know which cow is most efficient due to an inability to measure resources consumed on an individual basis although we can easily measure individual production. As a result we are forced to use average or overall measurements. The weight of the cow is not as important as the value of the production that results.

[PureCountry]

I certainly agree that the value of a cow's production is more important farmers_son, but if you have to follow some averages, you have to agree that on average a 1200lb. cow will eat less than the 1800lb., regardless of breed or color. So it only makes sense - like mcgrath said - to use smaller F1 cows to capitalize on their efficiency and maternal strengths, while leaning on the terminal sire for carcass, growth, performance, etc. One gives what the other lacks.

Like one of you mentioned though, there can be problems trying to find good F1 females. I've always wanted to market top-end F1 bred heifers, with a guarantee that they are what you say they are. However, when you consider the cost of purchasing purebred stock as the ingredients, the recipe doesn't look so tasty anymore.

Maybe one day when you've all read enough Galloway, Welsh Black, and Highland propaganda on here, rkaiser and me'll put on an F1 Bred Heifer sale. A few crosses each with a char, smurford, semi, guppy, angus, maine, and some luings from grassfarmer.

Of course, all bred to easy calving Galloway/Welsh bulls with the calves being eligible for the CrossVenture or Canadian Celtic Cattle program. How's that for 'value-added' or 'networking'?

[rkaiser]

Shoot Darcy, if there was only another half dozen guys like you in my life, I could save a few thousand dollars advertising.

Pretty hard for anybody to keep their cow herd size down these days.Almost any breed you mention will have some 1600 pound cows, or bigger. Show me one breeder, commercial or purebred, that culls his heifers based on being to big or how about too darn good lookin (generally goes hand in hand).

Pretty hard as well to say that buying a British bull will do it anymore. And what about those guys with the smaller thicker continentals who say they can moderate your cowherd with their bulls. Maybe after breeding this type of animal for a couple generations, but certainly ain't gonna work the first time. More about individual herd selection than any breed thing.

I'm going to take this opportunity to plug my breeds here. (If I don't Darcy certainly will) I would like to add a few other breeds like Murray Grey, Tarantaise, (if they had some hair), and maybe even the Canadain version of South Devon.

Amazing how these moderate framed cattle get ignored when the Cowboy hats come on. The top five or six cattle breeds (by number) in Canada were not always that way. At one point the industry demanded cattle like these and they came into their own. I guess we used up all the cattle entrepenuers in the 70's and 80's.

Today the industry is demanding a more moderate carcass, and an efficient productive brood cow (which by the way go hand in hand). Still the breeds that I have mentioned, Galloway, Welsh Black, etc. are looked at with a smirk.
Even with the small numbers in Canada these breeds have proven their worth with very competitive gains (something only continentals seem to be recognized for) excellent carcass value (something only Angus seems to be recognized for),and unbeatable feed conversion, efficiency and maternal characteristics (something Welsh Blacks and Galloways should be recognised for).

Sure changes will be made to downsize the Canadian herd, it's already happening. A bit ass backwards as Smgrath is saying, but it is happening. We didn't have time to wait, thus the beef project that is further ahead than any branded project of it's kind has ever gotten. Except maybe the Angus project with millions of promotion dollars available.

[grassfarmer]

Sean, I agree with you, it is the stupid way to do it - I don't think it even needs debating. It is patently obvious that it is not smart maintaining huge cows to breed to a small breed bull. Speaking of calving difficulties my neighbour that uses this type of breeding program assists about a third of his cows to calf. He keeps them in corrals where they don't get exercise - I guess if you were to make 1800lb cows walk a half mile to eat their hay out in the pasture every day they would eat 60lbs instead of 50lbs. This type of breeding is the definition of inefficiency in my book.

[cowman]

Cow size is a funny thing. I believe part of the problem is people need to figure out what works best for their environment? I doubt it would make much sense to run heavy milking cows out in the dessert? Or for that matter tough little survivors on lush pasture?
I see so many cattle herds of cows bred to be tough so overfed that how do you not get problems? Red or black baldies as lardy as can be laying around on green alphalfa hay! Probably bred to a big tough char or Maine!
In my opinion a cow should be grass fat going into winter and come out skinny. She should be walking for water and feed everyday.
I wonder if some people ever consider what it costs to feed that cow? Or is it: Well we grew a super crop of hay...so we may as well feed the whole works! Quite frankly if you can afford to bed your calves in $80 aphlalfa then I expect you aren't really worried too much about being a low cost producer?
For the people who are trying to get more from the market place, I applaud you. But I believe everyone should realize that cutting costs can also make you more competitive? If you consider every expense very carefully you will soon find out which one is making you money and which isn't? And quite often it isn't a big AHA moment but many, many little savings that push you into the black instead of the red? I believe a "thrifty" attitude in any business is a good thing...as well as in your personal life?

[wd40]

A old cow man whos grandson now manages the large sucessful ranch told me once "Take the hide off, their all the same color" One of our biggest blind spots, which is often a fatal flaw is to get hung up on breeds. If we havn't figured out by now that there is a huge huge range in every breed in all aspects of the production cycle then we're blind. The key is the cost of production.

[raymondb]

I think the key is-"what does the customer want" and how much is the customer willing to pay for what he wants.
As a producer, my most important job is to contiuously know my customer wants and deliver a product that meets my customers expectations. I have to be able to do this while still making a dollar. I have to know all my costs and then do all I can to keep my costs in line while delivering a product that meets my customers expectations. It does not make any sense being the lowest cost producer with no customers.

[PureCountry]

Exactly, raymondb, great point. That is the key, and it's what makes our beef program work. Consistency in a product that demands a premium.

[farmers_son]

I doubt if anyone knows "what the customer wants". The customer doesn't know what they want much less communicate it to the producer. And the customer will tell you one thing but do another. For instance, say they want taste and quality but buy low price. If you are selling direct to a consumer, maybe the consumer says they want an aged product but what they really want is to feel special or superior because they can afford to demand something extra of you.

I would hope what you are really doing is producing for the most profitable market for your operation, taking into consideration returns and costs of production, economies of scale and so forth.

And size of cow has little to do with that.

[smcgrath76]

Glad to see a conversation about this.
I think what triggered my original post is some work I have been doing looking at genetic variation within breeds (or the range of variation). Using a bit of trickery with some information from USDA-MARC it is pretty interesting to see the "genetic overlap" in the major breeds. In other words, it appears somewhat that many breeders in every breed are selecting for the same things, even though their breeds "should?" more than likely be used for specific purposes. For example, there is a lot of overlap in milk genetics between terminal type breeds and maternal type breeds. I don't think this is a great surprise, but for us at home, our terminal bulls better not have a high milk number, as I would rather have muscle growth than milk production. It is also interesting to see breeds that are passing other breeds for traits that we consider the strengths of the breeds that are being passed. Has anyone looked at Milk numbers in Angus cattle lately?
Pretty much I agree with most of the comments posted above, but it is interesting to see how things are done, versus how we think they should be done.
Perhaps the biggest problem we face as an industry (RKaiser aside) is that even if we select on the information we know about our cattle (measured efficiency, growth, net return, etc.) most of us still sell our calves visually in large groups, or even in presort sales.
Basically, we put effort into selecting cattle that work and then just turn into a ring and say "These ones are pretty/shiny/taller/thicker so please bid an extra 5 cents."
A bit oversimplified, but certainly a goofy way to sell a product. I think that perhaps this is why we are seeing auction market volumes decline over the last several years. Certainly shows the difference between value added and commodity production.

[raymondb]

farmers-son--Do you know who your real customer is? My first line customer is not the consumer as I do not sell directly to the consumer. I am not smart enough or have the time or inclination to raise beef, finish beef,process and wrap beef and then sell the finished product after I put it on a shelf with enough lighting and color to make the consumer happy. I do the cow/calf thing and my main customer is the feedlot or the cattle broker. I talk to my customer and raise what he wants.My buyer gives me a price that I am satisfied with because I meet his needs. Yes I know what my customer wants.

[farmers_son]

And I would say that what your customer wants is to make money. Part of that is buying your cattle cheap.

There is a saying that when a customer buys a drill bit that is what he does, but what he wants is a hole.

smcgrath76: When you say it is a goofy way to sell a product, you need to keep in mind who is the seller. In the auction, the seller is the auctioneer, the fellow with the cattle in the ring is the prospect. The product is not cattle but rather image and "feel good" for the producer who wants to go home with a good feeling about his worth as a cattleman. Bearing in mind what the "product" is, i.e. "feel good" the auction ring is an effective way to sell a product.

Getting back to weight of cow, the weight of a cow is an excellent indicator of the weight of the cow and nothing else.