Global Warming

[grassfarmer]

Oh Parsley, what nonsense you post - implying there was such a shortage of bulls in the 1950s caused by legislation that breeders were forced to use undesirable bulls. In fact there were plenty bulls available of all sizes, the fashion however was for small bulls and they were the ones making the top money. It was a world wide trend just as the craze for breeding cattle with bigger numbers (EPD numbers)rather than breeding better cattle is the current craze. Downsizing cattle had nothing to do with legislation just producers making decisions in the free marketplace that subsequently turned out to be the wrong direction to go.

Your little attempt to sound superior backfired too - I didn't say you posted an article I said "the articles you posted" as that is the correct terminology for points in a legal document.

[parsley]

jensend,

If you learned strict govt control doesn't work, then it stands to reason you would also agree that jailing farmers for what they grow or forcing farmers to participate in pooling via legislation does not work.


I have a very open mind to changing those realities. But is your mind open enough to work towards change?

Parsley

[parsley]

I'll explain in a different way.

When I visited with many many commercial Canadian and American cattlemen in the early sixties, and I did, they were frustrated.

They often went to purebred sales to buy the required bull, but they were not happy with what was being generally offerred. And they were not allowed to buy scrub bulls, so they selected the required purebred bulls from the breeder's offerrings. Many different kinds..angus herefored, shorthorn etc.

Yearling purebred bulls were mostly short and squatty, and weighed-up by fat, as opposed to muscle and length.

Two year old purebred bulls were often overweight as well as short and squatty, and had to be taken home and "slimmed down" before being put out to pasture.

The trend was indeed,to breed short and squatty, but many commercial men didn't want to buy them. They lost pounds when they took them to market.Instead of tall rangy calves in the fall that could pack meat on a large frame, the calves ended up with a yearling weight at market that caused pain in the farmer's purse.

The two year old feeder had to be fed barley until mud-fat to get a few extra dollars.

The cattleman had to buy the bull because that is what was offerred, but there began low grumbling about having to buy purebred stock. Commercial men started to use their home-own bulls in some cases. Scrub bulls. Quietly.


Dwarfism was rearing it's head. And more and more often. Vets were giving a "heads up", but many purebred breedersvision. It was the trend.

But purebred breeders were not about to be told the trend was wrong, especially by the guy who ultimately paid the price...the commercial man. After all, breeders sold their bulls for top cash, to farmers who had no other choice.

Dwarfism became a problem. Technically it can be described as such:

QUOTE
The etiologies for congenital bovine fetal anomalies can be divided into heritable, toxic, nutritional, and infectious categories. Although uncommon in most herds, inherited congenital anomalies are probably present in all breeds of cattle and propagated as a result of specific trait selection that inadvertently results in propagation of the defect. In some herds, the occurrence of inherited anomalies has become frequent, and economically important. Anomalous traits can affect animals in a range of ways, some being lethal or requiring euthanasia on humane grounds, others altering structure, function, or performance of affected animals. Veterinary practitioners should be aware of the potential for inherited defects, and be prepared to investigate and report animals exhibiting abnormal characteristics. This review will discuss the morphologic characteristics, mode of inheritance, breeding lines affected, and the availability of genetic testing for selected heritable bovine fetal abnormalities.UNQUOTE


There are pages and pages of scientific papers done on dwarfism. Read them for yourself. Mostly, it is attributed to breeding programs.


Actually, Red Williams, from the U of S, recognized the problem of dwarfism in purebred beef breeding programs, and even though he took a lot of flack from cattlemen, he highlighted the problem and promoted crossbreeding.

I wouldn't have commented, if it was as you say, "just producers making decisions in the free marketplace that subsequently turned out to be the wrong direction to go."


I made a comment because there was a legislative component to what they did, in that the commercial man was required to buy purebred bulls, and that resulted in commercial men losing money from dwarf calves, poor weights and ending up, in some cases, with a low quality herd of cattle.


I can only describe what I lived, breathed and learned from those years. I was there.


Control didn't work. The commercialman finally had enough, and began his new vision.

Lesson Learned?: I am leery of master planners who think they know best for me.

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley...

Social engineering comes in many forms... take KVD for instance...

We have a great Hard White wheat... and the CWB kills it for political reasons!

Now Pioneer has a shot at being the new kid on the block... to grace the CWB's 'vast knowledge and wisdom' on how to market white wheat!

The CWB can't even market barley or know when to bow out gracefully... when they do a wicked bad job... if there was no 'single desk' they would know when to get out... before they lost millions and growers went somewhere else!

But OH no... the masters in Winnipeg are the smartest wisest people God ever graced this planet with... so they must get their finger into everything and mess it up royally!

[parsley]

Tom4CWB,

Social Engineers seem badly mired in a place from which they cannot lift their minds.

If Big Joe went to a foreign country, and observed that strict government control really doesn't work, but then came home and wanted continue to use force to keep the CWB in place, I think most folks would be downright baffled by his inconsistent reasoning.

But then I read SDA, and copied this phrase from todays page:

"ignorance is the absence of knowledge, but stupidity is the possession of knowledge and the refusal to use it intelligently"

Tom, social engineers reason quite differently.

Parsley

[bduke]

Parsely...the SDA quote "...but stupidity is the possession of knowledge and the refusal to use it intelligently" may be overly kind. I think the word refusal could be replaced with insensateness in many instances.
Also IMHO social engineers do not "trust", and therefore they demand rules and regulations for contentment. Unfortunately they are often a false, and costly, sense of security in my opinion....Bill

[parsley]

I'm the stupid one. Sheesch! I had to look up the word "insensateness"!

Parsley

[bduke]

Sorry Parsely.....I thought addlepated was a little too
harsh... and doltish a little too crass.... Bill