Northeastfarmer
Member
- Location
- Cleveland
Not ethical farming in my eyes but they didn’t seem bothered
If you tell lies you'll get caught out eventually
- Thread starter M-J-G
- Start date
- Location
- Ardrossan Ayrshire
No its not, as a necessary routine procedure its not how animals should be bred. But I don't think that the general public would say caesarians are a bad thing. Plenty of humans have them, 25% of UK births currently.
M-J-G
Member
I don't need the public to tell me that breeding cattle that cannot give birth naturally is fukt up.
Back to thread origin, when the Jagerbomb truth finally comes out how much credibility will bull buyers have in the limousin breed and their supposed high ebv's. There will be breeders cr*****g themselves and culling potential breeding animals now that the BLCS is DNA profiling 1st calvers. Imo there will be other potential cases to the fore probably involving unfortunate innocents on the receiving end.The BLCS society can not go forward in its present form if seen to be compliant in any of this affair.
- Location
- Ardrossan Ayrshire
Neither is keeping breeding sheep that need intervention at lambing, or that get cast , but plenty do it. Its a matter of perspective and what you are used to.
Just to be clear, you should assist at birth etc if required, and put the ewes back on their feet when they get stuck, but you shouldn't breed from them or their offspring, otherwise you will end up in the situation that the BB were in.
Northeastfarmer
Member
- Location
- Cleveland
I’m not sure anyone keeps a sheep knowing that it will get rigged it’s just unfortunate and if they are keeping sheep that They know will need a ceaser then it’s as bad as the Belgian cattle.
- Location
- Ardrossan Ayrshire
I didn't say caesarian, I said assist. Pull, manipulate etc.
Northeastfarmer
Member
- Location
- Cleveland
Well I don’t see anything wrong with pulling a lamb, I’ve used the jack on cows plenty over the years
- Location
- Ardrossan Ayrshire
Not a thing wrong with assisting an animal that cannot successfully birth itself, its the only thing to do. To not do so is negligent and cruel, obviously you agree. I am saying that unless you remove these animals from the breeding herd/flock you are headed down the same road as the old BB. They were at the far end of this road.
Northeastfarmer
Member
- Location
- Cleveland
I partly agree but in my experience I’ve had cows that one year they’ve needed assistance and other year they cough them out
M-J-G
Member
Assisting wins over a dead one every time.
- Location
- Perthshire, Scotland
Cannot like that enough.
That’s what we are here to do, help and look after the animals in our charge
- Location
- Ardrossan Ayrshire
Yes. Same bull? The point I was trying to make is that it depends how far you want to go to get what you want. Most folk have a point where they say "Enough!". Frequent Caesareans would be the point for many (not the Belgian breeders) , for others it would be pulling at birth, or having couped sheep or sheep that needed wormed. ( @Tim W )
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
That was never a fault of the system, just the way breeders chose to implement it.
When selection was purely on flat out production traits without regard to type merit, the result was increased production, without necessarily having functional cattle. Where breeders chose to consider type too, improvement on ‘production’ May have been slower, but cattle remained functional.
I would suggest it was evidence to support breeders should be looking at individual trait (production & type in the case of dairy cattle), rather than a weighted index/PIN/PLI/etc, where the trait weighting is decided by the fashion of the day.
I have strict rules with my pedigrees, anything needing assistance in any way(calving, feeding calf, feet problems) is out the pedigree herd and into the commercial herd. I only keep my replacements and bulls born in the first 6 weeks, I'm gradually improving the fertility, and now seeing an improvement in calving and everything else. It's taken a good few years but it's what I want to be able to sell to customers knowing that there should be no problems.
- Location
- Buxton, Derbyshire
I'm not going to argue with the science. If a bulls physical performance only contributes 20% of his figures, why is this not published by ahdb or whoever? Maybe if breeders realised that they wouldn't bugger about falsifying records?His physical data goes into creating it of course, but his own physical performance doesn't count for very much of it, but transmission is factored into an EBV, how else could you use a parents performance to form a figure.
I can't really speak for Signed, I worked for them for a short while in the 90s.
When I later worked in research we used to quantify recorded animals and compare transmission of traits, and I was as a young lad initially shocked at how little the animals actual data goes towards it's EBVs, think around 20% ish, which is partly why imports go in at average despite being from a test station, because it's only raw data, and not backed up by historical performance, parentage or transmission.
As for adjustments, your "best cow" who is 10yo who started out with reasonable figures could easily sink well below breed average, and the bull you bred off old semen could be massive minuses, despite having good performance.
I know dairy bulls with - milk figures today that were +800 less than a decade ago.
That's what adjustments do, your base changing won't work in your favour unless you use the newest and best genetics, newest and best are said tongue in cheek BTW
The reason we don't use the same system as the dairy guys is because they have thousands of progeny off sires and grand sires, all over the world and their production is recorded regularly.
They have a huge mass of data.
How many 2-300 cow pedigree beef herds do you know, particularly ones who are all using AI sires with 10,000 performance recorded daughters in 500 herds around the world most of which are performance recording?
I'm guessing you don't know any, because I sure don't, and the dairy industry has 10s of thousands of those herds, all putting data into a system.
They are the Harley Davidson of EBVs, and by comparison we are a strimmer running on top much 2 stroke with a hole in the fuel line, caused mainly by small herds, small numbers off even popular beef sires and a distinct lack of cross herd references.
Why is that cow your best cow if she is below average for most traits? If she is 10yrs old she should have several progeny included in her EBV, and to not improve her EBV to keep pace with base changes it would be expected for her to have produced average or below average progeny. Yes those progeny may be better than ones born 20yrs ago but they would be worse than ones born in the same year. Hence why her figures appear to have dropped, when in reality they have stayed the same and everyone else has got better. And as breeders shouldn't we be constantly progressing the genetics of our herds and not just 'preserving' them? By the way I don't use 20-30yr old genetics, I'm looking to use their sons, grandsons and great grandsons.
Yes the dairy industry has access to massive amounts of data, but they also work across borders and have formulas to convert American, Canadian, Dutch, French etc figures to British. Signet don't seem to want to do that, so we are missing out on huge amounts of data that would improve accuracy and potentially improve the ability to use genomics.
I'm not sure what herd size has to do with it, except maybe a small improvement on accuracy. When we were milking we had 50 pedigree cows with 2 stock bulls and no AI, so similar to most beef herds. All our calves all had PTA figures calculated on their pedigree certificates.
I know dairy figures are the best, hence why I can see so many problems with the current beef system.
- Location
- Buxton, Derbyshire
I'd love to go the Blonde testing station at Casteljaloux and see what they do.
Why are EBVs for both beef cattle and sheep becoming more or less irrelevant?
Certainly at Limousin sales, male and female, there seems to be no correlation between EBVs and prices. Reputation seems to be far more important, and there are enough Bulls of most breeds available at prices where we can afford to progeny-test them, and cull the poor performers.
If I am buying a bull or tup, my main concern is that he is likely to be homozygous (pre-potent) for the relevant traits, and that he will pass them on to his offspring, regardless of whether or not my cows or ewes are homozygous.
Certainly at Limousin sales, male and female, there seems to be no correlation between EBVs and prices. Reputation seems to be far more important, and there are enough Bulls of most breeds available at prices where we can afford to progeny-test them, and cull the poor performers.
If I am buying a bull or tup, my main concern is that he is likely to be homozygous (pre-potent) for the relevant traits, and that he will pass them on to his offspring, regardless of whether or not my cows or ewes are homozygous.
M-J-G
Member
In the UK they are of limited value as far as beef is concerned, if you can be tuned into your particular breed and know what lines he really do what you eill have a better idea than an EBV will give you.
This isn't a popular opinion with some breeders, but the system isn't really designed for UK type pedigree herds.
M-J-G
Member
It's hard not to touch on the science.
The fact that it's not a representation of the bulls own personal performance record is already explained by the fact that it's Estimated and that it's a Breeding Value, without wanting to sound obvious but the clue is in the name! I see no need for this to be explained further by AHDB.
If breeders had a clue about BLUP they would know not to bother trying to cheat, but figures have been around for longer than I have and many people still don't have much of a clue about them.
Your very cow could still be your best cow without having good figures.
Are you saying that the quality and ability of your cattle are truly represented by their figures? You'll be one of the few beef breeders that can truly say that.
The reason why herd size matters is because the more cattle you have the more sires you need and the greater numbers of cross herd referencing you have to link with other herds.
For example someone with 20 pure cows and 1 stock bull and no AI is more poorly linked to other herds than someone who has 200 pure cows 6 bulls from 6 different homes and using 5 different AI sires on their cows and selling 10 bulls into pedigree herds where progeny will be recorded.
Its not just about accuracy, the greater the number of plots on the graph the more trends show up and the easier it is to draw a line.
The middle ground is a smaller herd using well recorded AI sires for generations, as the cross herd references are stronger.
The key with EBVs is to have as many ways as possible to compare an animal to as many animals as possible, and for that you need a critical mass of data, if you are below that you struggle to function, hence my hole in the fuel line reference, and for that you need numbers, if you haven't got that you are more heavily reliant on links like AI or trading stock between recorded herds.
Unfortunately most UK pedigree herds don't lend themselves to this, hence the reason they aren't working particularly well.
Last edited: