ON THE OTHER HAND
Profitable Livestock Production
PJ Budler
CHAPTER IV
BALANCE
Balance is a term that we use flippantly. It’s used in a similar way to “equity” or “sustainability”. I think that we need to define these terms that have become cliches or buzz words.
Balance means several things to me when evaluating livestock.
Physiological Balance – where all the body parts fit together appropriately and in the right proportions.
Endocrinological Balance – where all the glands are functioning efficiently and releasing hormones at optimum levels. This will be reflected in the animal’s phenotype.
Balance between Muscle (The product we produce) and Fat (The energy it takes to produce that product).
Testosterone makes muscle, so in bulls we need a muscle>fat balance. Estrogen makes fat, so in females we need a fat>muscle balance.
Hormonal Balance – where bulls are masculine with plenty of punch, thump and grunt. Ruggedness and power indicates testosterone flow. In females we need the opposite. Ladylike females with more refinement. Faces like princesses and butts like cooks.
Data Balance – if you’re using data, avoid negative outliers. Select FOR fertility (Fat and Scrotal Circumference) and AGAINST high birth weight, low weaning weight, low yearling weight, low milk, low muscle, high mature cow size etc. Selecting FOR low birth weight, high weaning weight, high milk, high yearling weight, high muscle etc will lead to a cowherd with high energy requirements (Antagonistic to Fertility).
In other words, the bull with BALANCE is just a really good AVERAGE (OPTIMUM) bull. Not too much of anything but enough of everything. The challenge is to get breeders, marketers, breed associations and animal scientists to embrace optimum over maximum.
CHAPTER III
FERTILITY
Fertility is the number one livestock trait in driving profitability in a livestock operation.
Fertility is highly heritable when measured correctly.
Hormonal Balance plus High Inherent Body Condition equal Fertility.
Select masculine, full bodied, early maturing, well muscled, easy fleshing bulls to build a fertile and sustainably profitable cowherd.
If you’re studying EPD’s/EBV’s, the two most important numbers to focus on are Fat and Scrotal Circumference. They both need to be positive.
ESSAY A
ON THE OTHER HAND
Cattle selection decisions based on objectives, resources and environment.
Genetics are the point of the arrow when it comes to the livestock industry. Although genetics are of equal importance to disciplines such as herd management, nutrition, animal health, marketing, forages, record keeping and Human Resources, genetics remain the prime mover.
As the last link in the value chain, the consumer being the first link, genetics determine how the rest of the value chain flourishes or fails.
It is the duty of the seed-stock producer to act as a scientist with their ranch or farm being their laboratory. By adapting their genetics to the particular environment, resources and objectives they’re dealing with, the seed-stock producer experiments, invents and proves or disproves genetics.
There are an abundance of selection tools available to cattle breeders. These tools vary from traditional to cutting edge and are all used to differing degrees within both the beef and dairy industries.
The selection tools I’ll discuss in this article include phenotype, pedigree, in-herd indexes, Production Based Culling, EBVs/EPDs, and Genomics/Genomic enhanced EPDs. All of these tools can be useful when making breeding decisions provided that they are used in context and with a non-biased and balanced approach.
The first objective to be considered is whether the animal you’re wanting to breed is destined to be utilized in a maternal breeding program or as a terminal animal for beef. The selection criteria for these two options is vastly different and I’ll go into more details in paragraphs to come.
A premise to consider is that there are two types of traits in a maternal breeding program. Profit traits which include adaptability, functional efficiency, fertility and longevity. Turnover traits which include growth, muscle, milk and marbling. Turnover traits are very important, but are meaningless if profit traits are not used to lay the initial foundation.
Every breeding decision needs to be made according to objectives, resources and environment. Without matching these decisions to these three factors, there’s a good chance of missing your target.
The animal’s Pedigree is extremely valuable when making selections. Understanding or remembering pedigrees is fast becoming a lost art in the age of genomics, however, pedigree is the motherlode from whence all these technologies have sprung. Traits such as mothering ability, libido, temperament/aggression, wellbeing and hardiness are immeasurable in any accurate form by any technology. The knowledge of the ability for certain bloodlines and cow families to work together is where the art of breeding comes to fruition. A lot of selection criteria is too nuanced for scientific method.
Phenotype is extremely useful, and I’d say essential, when making breeding decisions. A lot of what data or EBVs/EPDs are telling you can be seen in the animal itself. The analogy that I like to use is that when you are told that it is raining outside, one can simply open the curtains and take a look instead of checking the weather application on one’s smartphone. Growth, Fat, Muscle, Milk, Calving Ease and a host of other traits are as easily observed with the human eye as they are read off of a chart. When doing phenotypic selections, one needs to first consider if the animals are maternal or terminal.
In maternal animals, cattle need to be able to eat, walk and reproduce. Focussing on the Profit Traits (adaptability, functional efficiency, fertility and longevity) is first and foremost. Balance is essential. This includes physiological and endocrinological balance, carcass balance (muscle/fat ratio), skeletal balance and hormonal balance. High inherent body condition (easy fleshing ability/do-ability/constitution) plus hormonal balance equals fertility.
In terminal animals, the fundamental traits remain vital. In animals bred for a high yielding carcass, factors to focus on are a high growth rate and large rib-eye area. Dimension is essential too, as three dimensional animals produce heavy carcasses. Carcass balance is essential still as fat cover is needed for good grading and fleshing ability whilst muscle is required for yield. Structural soundness is essential in terminal animals too. Structurally unsound animals tend to founder and go lame when in the feedlot. These animals lose their appetite and don’t gain appropriately. Also, steers have sisters and mothers out grazing on pasture their entire lives, so ignoring structure in terminally bred cattle is dangerous.
In terminal animals bred for high quality eating experiences like the Japanese and South Korean breeds, the logic remains similar in terms of structural integrity. Carcass balance leans further towards marbling traits with muscle being necessary but not pinnacle. Waxy horns, a sharp poll (or a fine ridge between the horns), oily skin, silky hair coat, flat and fine bone with small joints and a flatter muscle-shape all augur well for high-marbling carcasses.
Production Based Culling is a term I use where replacement females and breeding bulls are selected based on the fact that their dams, grand-dams and great-grand-dams have simply jumped over every hurdle the breeder has placed in front of them regarding criteria to remain in the herd. These include reasonable nutritional supplementation, age at first calving, inter-calving-period, short breeding seasons, cow/calf ratio at weaning, minimum weaning weights, unassisted births etc. This is a fast way of building a profitable, consistent, adapted and uniform herd.
In-herd Indexes were the primary arithmetic used for cattle selection prior to the arrival of EBVs and EPDs. These in-herd indexes remain a vital tool when customers purchase animals from a reliable seed-stock breeder or when the seed-stock breeder is presenting their product to the market. They give context to how animals have performed in their given environment and herd. It is important to remember that not all herds are the same. A 100 index in a progressive herd is superior to a 100 index in a less progressive herd. However, if one is familiar with and utilizes a registered herd for their seed-stock needs, using in-herd indexes for selection purposes is very valuable.
EBVs/EPDs/Breed Population Indexes are widely used worldwide by animal producers. These numbers are based on the in-herd ratios of the animal itself as well as the in-herd-indexes of its ancestors, siblings, relatives and offspring. EBVs (Expected Breeding Values)/EPDs (Expected Progeny Differences) can be extremely useful if used in context and with matching them to objectives, resources and environment. As a breeder, one needs to decide whether one trusts these numbers being published by their specific breed society/association. If the breeder believes that they are relevant and that most breeders are measuring everything, all the time, accurately, honestly, in large numbers and in the same environment then it is important to remember that the number being produced is an objective one. Therefore, no EPD/EBV can be good or bad. It depends on one’s objectives, resources and environment.
In maternal breeding programs it is essential to remember that the sex hormones only start when the growth hormones stop. Therefore, if one selects for high growth numbers, one is directly selecting against fertility. Selecting for fertility starts with high inherent body condition and hormonal balance. On an EBV/EPD chart that would mean higher BACK/RUMP FAT numbers and higher SCROTAL CIRCUMFERENCE at a year of age. Selecting for Top 5% Weaning and Yearling Weight continuously will create higher birth weights, leaner, later maturing and less fertile cattle with higher energy requirements. Selecting for high inherent body condition and early sexual maturity will produce cattle with high relative (reaching mature size early) growth rates, low energy requirements and high fertility. If one feels that the average animal in one’s breed is big enough, it makes no sense to require anything more than breed average EPD/EBV Yearling Weight or Mature Cow Size. Similar logic works with all traits.
You’ll notice that herds that have focused heavily on growth and carcass traits for some time will have a lack of sexual dimorphism in their cattle. There won’t be much difference in size and shape between the bulls and females. This sexual monomorphism is an expression of hormonal imbalance and sub-fertility. The bulls tend to be less masculine and the females less feminine. Sexual dimorphism occurs when selection for high inherent body condition and hormonal balance is practiced. These animals are earlier maturing and more fertile. The bulls are significantly larger and shaped and colored differently to the females.
Publishing trait leaders is counter-intuitive in my opinion. For example, why is less fat better than more fat when publishing a FAT trait leaders list? Doesn’t it depend on the objectives, resources and environment of the breeding program? Big, lean, late maturing cattle are great for feedlots and processors, but devastatingly expensive to keep for cow-calf operators. What good is giving the tools of a Top 1% for a trait like Milk to marketing companies to run with? Top 1% for milk doesn’t even make a profitable dairy cow, never mind how destructive it proves to be for beef cow operators.
In terminal breeding programs, traits such as Weaning Weight, Yearling Weight, Ribeye Area and Intramuscular Fat become important. Managing birth weight to where it’s functional is important.
Genomic Enhanced EBVs/EPDs are based on the same premise as EBVs/EPDs. However, the actual genetics of the animal are taken into consideration and not just the average EBVs/EPDs of sire and dam at birth are considered. GE-EPDs/GE-EBVs increase the accuracy of an EPD/EBV for an animal with no offspring to have the same accuracy of that same animal if it had had up to a dozen offspring. If the premise of EPD’s and EBV’s make sense to the breeder, then GE-EPDS/GE-EBVs will work for them.
If however, a breeder does not agree that the data being used to create GE-EPDs/GE-EBVs is measured entirely, honestly, accurately, in large numbers, all the time, eliminating environmental influence by most breeders then it is probably better to revert to the other tools in the selection toolbox. These being Phenotype, Pedigree, In-herd Indexes and Production Based Culling.
Cattle breeding is as much an art as it is a science. Artists and scientists alike are passionate and obsessive about their work. Context and nuance are key.
ANECDOTE 14
Selecting replacement females in a commercial beef herd should be logical. Let’s assume it’s a first cut and heifers are yearlings. Assume too that all the females are from the same contemporary group and have been managed responsibly.
First, remove any heifer that has an unadapted phenotype.
Second, remove any female showing masculine characteristics or lack of hormonal balance.
Third, remove any heifer with poorer body condition or fleshing ability
Fourth, remove heifers with poor skeletal structure (Feet, legs, jaws, shoulders, spine etc)
If what is left over is still more than what you need to keep, just peel off your least favorite until you get to your number.
Voila!
ANECDOTE 5
There is a theme across North American Animal Science departments, breed associations and judging rings where later maturing, leaner cattle are rewarded and promoted. This only makes sense if the link in the value chain you’re serving is not the primary producer. Of course, feed-lotters and processors prefer these cattle, but leaner, later maturing cattle are antagonistic to profitability in a cow/calf business.
In North America, by 24 months, the heifers need to be close to calving, the bulls need to be working and the steers need to be dead. Later maturing cattle can only get all three of those done with supplementary feed. Early maturing, easy fleshing cattle can do it inherently. All three of those disciplines require adequate body condition and that can be achieved at substantial cost or genetically. Genetically is a more profitable and sustainable option.
CHAPTER V
If your eye is tuned to functional efficiency, then phenotype is paramount.
If quality and beauty is represented by adaptability, functional efficiency, fertility and longevity, then no data or pedigree can trump the eye of a stockman.
– Adaptability (Body Type, Maturity Pattern, Hair Type, Hide)
– Functional Efficiency (Physiological, Endocrinological, Hormonal and Muscle/Fat Balance)
– Fertility (Hormonal Balance & Inherent Body Condition)
– Longevity (Skeletal Integrity, Athleticism, Foot structure, Udder Quality and Scrotal and Sheath Design)
Select your short list based on visual appraisal only. Once you have established a short list, you can then reference PEDIGREE (Avoid any problematic ancestors regarding milk, temperament, negative recessive gene-carriers, bad udder quality etc).
Analyze data using nuance and context.
– Understand the population of animals that the bulls are being measured within. Is everyone, measuring everything, all the time, honestly, accurately, in large numbers, in the same environment?
– If this is the case that the numbers are a good reference, providing the accuracies are above a certain threshold.
– Optimum > Maximum always. Top 1% for any trait is a marketing gimmick, these animals seldom produce profitable daughters for cow/calf producers. They’re high turnover cattle, but low profitability cattle. Provided the numbers are accurate of course. Some Top 1% cattle have been very useful for cow/calf profitability, but only because the accuracies were low. (They’re not Top 1% in real life)
– Select FOR high fertility and AGAINST low performance
(As opposed to)
- Selecting AGAINST low fertility and FOR high performance
CHAPTER XII
A bull must be able to lift his head and see into the next county.
Skeletal structure is paramount to functionality and longevity.
The skeleton starts at the nose and ends at the tail switch. Understanding skeletal structure is key to selecting profitable cattle.
A strong jaw and wide muzzle are essential for foraging and also a true indication of genuine skeletal width and strength.
The angle at which the neck escalates out of the top of the shoulder is governed by the angle of the scapula. A well angled shoulder allows an animal to lift its head with ease. Too high an angle can result in a narrower chest floor and less heart girth, so balance is key.
A straight shoulder restricts an animal’s ability to naturally lift its head. This also causes less flexibility at the knee and less cushion in the pasterns. This will compromise foot shape due to excess pressure on the feet.
Many educators and cattle consultants love a dead-level top line. This is only good if the spine is relaxed on the move. A tighter spine will cause an animal to roach up on the move, and this limits longevity and athleticism.
Some angle from hip to pin is vital for a couple of reasons. Firstly that angle opens up the birth canal and allows for a far greater pelvic opening for calving ease purposes. Secondly, correct hip to pin angle allows for good angles on the hock joint and pastern. This allows for flexibility on the move.
This will also govern foot shape and quality.
Base width and chest floor are an indication of true skeletal width, this is important to allow for rib shape and rumen function. An opened up fore-rib in ruminants allows for additional organ capacity.
Width between the pins and wide hips in females illustrates hormonal balance. As does length of body relative to height.
In bulls, its width at the thighs and stifle joint indicates hormonal balance. Wide hips are a feminine trait. Width over the chine bone and top of the shoulders is a masculine trait.
Excessive bone is antagonistic to fertility. Extremely fine bone is antagonistic to longevity. Balance is key.
Excessive length of the long bones indicates late maturity and leanness.
Short cannon bones indicate high inherent body condition and early maturity.
Softness and cleanness of joints is essential. Avoid round bone and big, coarse joints.
An animal that appears comfortable, has a loose skeleton and is flexible on the move will logically be structurally sound with longevity built in.
Don’t compromise on structural soundness, ever. There’s profit in longevity.
ESSAY B
The Most Important Selection Tool in Beef Cattle Genetics
In this article I aim to discuss what I believe to be the most important tool(s) in making genetic selections in beef cattle. I’ll briefly discuss various selection methods and tools used in the USA and across the world and then give a summation of which I believe to be the most relevant in 21st century beef production.
I am going to focus on 4 broad categories of selection tools available to cattlemen today. I will argue for and against the use of each tool before giving my opinion on which the most important tool is.
In his book, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, CS Lewis uses an illustration of Santa Claus meeting up with the three children once they discover the magical kingdom of Narnia. Santa gives each one of the children a gift to assist them in staying safe while they’re in Narnia. Lucy is given a dagger and a special cordial that can heal the sick; Susan is given a bow and arrows, and a special horn that will always bring help when blown; and Peter is given a sword. As Santa’s sleigh departs he looks back at the children and says, “Remember children, these gifts are tools and not toys!”
If cattlemen could apply this principle to the four tools to be discussed in this article, steady progress would be achievable for certain.
These are tools and not toys.
There should be a large “Caution” sticker on each of these four tools.
Temple Grandin, world renowned animal husbandry expert puts it this way – “Today we have access to science and algorithms that we’ve never had before in the cattle business. We are able to make progress at great speed. A word of caution though. It’s a whole lot easier to cut off one’s arm with a power tool than with a hand held saw.”
Tool No. 1 – Phenotype
Using visual appraisal or phenotype as a tool for selecting cattle is still extremely popular all over the world. Many commercial cattlemen maintain that evaluating an animal’s appearance when compared to his/her contemporaries can tell you just about all you need to know about that animal. The show ring, for the most part, still puts all of its emphasis on phenotype.
The Pro’s
The major pro in using phenotype as a tool is to measure traits such as udder quality, testicle shape, temperament, athleticism and soundness, pigmentation and color, muscle pattern and structural integrity. To get an objective reading on these traits is near impossible and these traits really are extremely important. When one considers how many cattle are purchased and sold based on eye appeal, it would be foolish to ignore this tool.
Within a contemporary group it is also possible to evaluate traits such as growth or milk production by using phenotype.
For the most part, when one uses balance as a measuring stick in using phenotype as a tool, the outcome will be rather positive.
The Con’s
Human nature has led to cattle being bred with extreme ideals in mind. By ignoring nature’s need for balance, cattlemen have chased various extremes in single trait, phenotypic selection. In an attempt to improve growth and performance, we have made cattle too big and tall; in an attempt to improve muscle tone and shape, we have created cattle that cannot calve unassisted or move freely; in attempt to produce cattle with extremely low birth weights, we have created females with small enough pelvis’ that they can’t naturally calve when bred to regular bulls.
The main con to using phenotype as a stand-alone trait is that we cannot easily bring cattle from different regions together to evaluate them. Also, there are certain traits such as feed-efficiency, milk, marbling and some others that need to be measured in order to be applied in any shape or form.
Tool No. 2 – EBVs or EPDs
The introduction of Expected Breeding Values (EBVs) or Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) truly revolutionized pure-bred cattle production in both the dairy and beef industries. It became possible for cattle in different regions, different climates and different management systems to be compared with each other. This opened up the door for breeders to have more confidence to use a wider variety of genetics. It also exposed lesser known herds to the industry if they had superior genetics. With the discovery of the genome and the use of Genomics in advancing the accuracy of EPDs and EBVs, this tool has become all the more powerful.
The Pro’s
EBVs and EPDs are extremely useful when making selections within one’s herd to find the outliers and under-performers within a population.
They make sourcing potential new sires a whole lot easier by being incorporated into systems that can find individual animals based on parameters.
They have the ability to describe so much more about an animal’s capabilities than merely evaluating an animal phenotypically.
When making breeding selections, it allows breeders to potentially achieve balance by correcting weaknesses and solidifying strengths based on predictable expectations.
To a certain degree, a lot of guesswork has been taken out of breeding cattle.
In Dr Jan Bonsma’s book, Man Must Measure, he comprehensively laid out the value of record keeping.
The Cons
Too many breeders have used EBV’s and EPD’s as a marketing tool, rather than as a selection tool. Attaching financial value to a trait such as “Milk” for example has encouraged breeders to market cattle based on them being the No. 1 or in the Top 10% of a certain trait in the breed and then achieving premium prices based on promoting outliers.
This has led to cattle that are extremely good at a few traits and lacking in other fundamental areas. For example, beef females with very high milk numbers tend to struggle to maintain body condition through winter and rebreed after calving in areas with limited forage through the winter. Or, bulls with extremely low calving ease numbers tend to create daughters with smaller than necessary pelvic areas.
Some breeders have learned to manipulate numbers to enhance certain animal’s numbers.
Some breeders treat EPDs and EBVs as an exact science and tend to ignore other selection methods or tools.
By using in-herd ratios to build EPDs and EBVs, for the most part, these systems assume that the average animal in Herd A is equal to the average animal in Herd B.
The scenario below describes why this is problematic.
Herd A disperses their herd in the early spring.
Herd B buys the top 50% of all animals based on weaning weight EBV. (These are the only animals Herd A now owns). This totals 25 cows.
Herd C buys the bottom 50% of all animals based on weaning weight EBV. (These are the only animals Herd B now owns). This totals 25 cows.
Herd B and Herd C are neighbors. They use the same nutrition and animal health program.
At weaning time in the autumn, Herd B’s average corrected weaning weight for bull calves is 250kg. (To ratio 100, a calf would have to weigh 250kg).
Herd C’s average corrected weaning weight for heifer calves is 225kg. (To ratio 100 a calf would have to weigh 225kg).
EPDs and EBVs would assume that the calves ratioing 100 in the two different herds are equal. This is problematic.
My proposed solution to making this system more accurate would be to handicap cattle like golf clubs handicap a golfer. Cattle would start off with their current EPDs or EBVs. In-herd ratioing would then no longer assume that every herds average is 100 for every trait.
A herd that emphasizes weaning weight could potentially have its average calf ratioing 104 (When converted on the system), whereas a herd with less genetic potential for growth could find their average calf ratioing 96 (When converted on the system).
Using these ratios to build EPDs and EBVs in the future would make published “accuracies” a whole lot more accurate.
Tool No. 3 – In-herd Ratio’s
In herd ratio’s were the way in which breeders’ performance tested their cattle before EBVs and EPDs were developed. These ratios only compared cattle within a contemporary group in a single herd or bull test.
However, the integrity of this on-property data capturing is what EPD’s and EBV’s are still based on today.
It is a simple tool which uses 100 as the average in any trait and then indicates that any animal with a ratio score above 100 is above average in its contemporary group and any animal with a ratio score below 100 is below average.
The Pro’s
When making selections, a breeder can immediately see how different genetics are performing on his property and in his environment.
Customers can use this tool when selecting cattle from a producer. It is customary for many commercial operations to use a select few seed-stock operations in their region to obtain their replacement females or bulls. When evaluating cattle, they can easily gauge where cattle are ranked within a particular contemporary group.
If a producer or customer is selecting within a single herd, this remains a most useful tool.
This works well if commercial cattlemen are cautious in buying into a breeding herd and trusting of the integrity of the numbers presented before them.
The Con’s
As described in the aforementioned scenario when discussing EPDs and EBVs, these ratios can often be misinterpreted as being average within a breed rather than just within a herd. A ratio of 100 in a really progressive herd can mean that animals are in the top 20% of the breed. On the contrary, an animal with a ratio of 100 in a herd with low potential for growth, could indicate that it really is in the bottom 20% of the breed for that particular trait.
Tool No. 4 – Pedigree
Tracing lineages and understanding the value of bloodlines was an art in the 19th and 20th centuries. Certain bloodlines were known to produce cattle that would excel at certain traits and large value was placed on animals based on pedigree alone. This was before performance testing and EBV’s/EPD’s came into existence. Although this still occurs today, it seems to have become less of an art. An art which I believe needs to be maintained.
The Pro’s
Understanding a pedigree and having an in-depth knowledge of bloodlines can be largely useful when making selection decisions.
Certain bloodlines can be synonymous with negative traits such as bad temperament, poor feet, structurally incorrect udders and teats etc. In the same way, certain bloodlines are known for longevity, mothering ability, early maturity or good skull structure.
A lot of these traits can only be known by knowing a pedigree.
When a bull comes into a sale ring, it might be visually appealing, have balanced EPDs and a great in-herd ratio, but his dam may have been wild, had very large teats or bad feet. In this case it’s only those who take the time to go back into the pedigree that will avoid purchasing or using, this otherwise desirable animal.
The Con’s
There are many breeder’s to this day that insist on purchasing or placing value on an animal just because it is the offspring of a certain animal. This can be fine, provided phenotype, EBVs/EPDs and in-herd ratios are also acceptable.
In Conclusion
If I were to rank these selection tools from first to fourth, I would rank them all first. They are all the most important and all need to be used 100%.
If one eliminates any one of these tools, there is a danger of overemphasizing by means of single trait selection.
Make use of all four tools and balance all the traits, and steady progression is possible.
Like spokes on the wheel of a bicycle, it is essential that these four tools are given equal attention. If one spoke is longer or shorter than the others, the bicycle ride is not very comfortable and a flat tyre is inevitable.
ANECDOTE 17
It’s 12 o’clock somewhere
Cattle breeding, in “advanced” and “scientific” circles is often broken down into linear measurements and linear scores and linear measurements. This system, however, combined with human nature encourages breeders to strive for maximum instead of optimum.
Cattle breeding principles, when responsibly applied, are circular, and not linear.
Consider a clock, with 12 o’clock being optimum. In this scenario, 10 to 12 is not quite optimum, but is workable. 10 past 12 means that the train has left the station, and in order to reach optimum again, the long hand needs to go all the way around to 12 again. Circular breeding strives for optimum. being at the station at 10 to 12 still gets you on the train. 10 past 12 (or negative or positive outliers) miss the train. These outliers need to be avoided when breeding decisions are made.
Circular breeding principles would also encourage the following.
When striving for a middle of the road phenotype, use middle of the road bulls. Avoid fire and ice matings. Breeding a giant to a midget to get a middle of the road calf, will get you some giants, some midgets and some around the middle of the road. However, the middle of the road cattle produced in this fashion won’t necessarily be prepotent and breed middle of the road calves. This applies to any measurable traits, maturity patterns and body types.
In the same way, don’t breed an endurance horse to a short distance horse to get a middle distance horse.
The 12 o’clock animal doesn’t have too much of anything, but has enough of everything.
So by maximizing adaptability, functional efficiency, fertility and longevity and optimizing all other traits we can produce balanced, profitable livestock. Average cattle. The best “average” cattle might not make the headlines, but they’ll keep one in business.
ANECDOTE 6
Growing up I always heard about heterosis or hybrid vigor being a free lunch.
And we applied this and believed it!
And there are tremendous tangible gains when crossing two different breeds or types of cattle. From growth and milk traits to longevity and body condition, heterosis allows offspring to outperform their parents.
But heterosis also can negatively affect traits like uniformity, predictability, birth weight, type and even temperament.
I’m a proponent of utilizing heterosis in many different scenarios, but it isn’t a free lunch. There really is no free lunch in the cattle business. It’s more about adapting breeding programs to match objectives, resources and environment.
CHAPTER XI
Muscle, Muscle, Muscle!
Muscle is the product we produce!
Muscle expression is uniquely different though in bulls, steers and females.
In hormonally balanced cattle this trait is expressed differently due to sex hormones.
Testosterone makes muscle. A masculine, hormonally balanced bull will have tone and shape to his muscle. He’ll also have the evidence of muscling in his neck. This is a secondary sexual trait. This testosterone will also create a coarser hair coat over the head and neck, tail switch and sheath tassels. The neck and crest will be visibly darker in color than the hair covering the center-body and hind quarters.
Estrogen makes fat. Females should be well fleshed and full bodied, absent of significant muscle shape and tone. A beef cow really should look like a fuller bodied, easier fleshing dairy cow if she is hormonally balanced. She will also be more uniform in color and refined in structure. Her hair will be more silky in nature and her switch hair a lot finer.
In bulls and females excessive bone is a product of growth hormones being propagated over sex hormones.
A steer’s growth and shape is determined by growth hormones rather than sex hormones. Even a really well muscled steer that has been castrated early in life won’t be limited in the length of its long bones. (Ossification and sex hormones limit long bone growth). A well muscled steer will not have the neck muscling and crest of a hormonally balanced bull. A steer will have the ability to put a layer of fat on without the fat being burned up by testosterone. Single color steers will be more uniform in color.
CHAPTER XIII
FAT – Good, Bad or Ugly?
World leading livestock thinker and philosopher, Johann Zietsman eloquently stated: “Fat is an essential component of sustainable profitability. You can either breed fat into cattle or feed fat into cattle. If you breed cattle to feed them, you’ll have to feed cattle to breed them.”
High inherent body condition, or easy fleshing ability is a cornerstone of fertility. Hormonally balanced animals with high inherent body condition are fertile. These two traits are both highly heritable which, logically, makes fertility highly heritable too, if measured correctly.
Excessive feeding of sale or show cattle will reverse hormonal balance and cause sub-fertility.
There are several positive traits which correlate with high inherent body condition.
These cattle are earlier maturing.
The bulls are fertile at a younger age.
The females reach estrous at a younger age.
They are genetically more fertile.
They are non-selective grazers.
They have more even dispositions (better natured cattle).
When the steak hits the plate, it’s a better eating experience.
In short, earlier maturing, easier fleshing cattle are more profitable for primary producers in the cow/calf sector.
Leaner, later maturing cattle are more profitable for meat packers and processors.
ESSAY D
Understanding EPDs
Are they an exact science? An incomplete math equation? A useful tool? Or are they a dangerous toy?
In his book, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, CS Lewis uses an illustration of Santa Claus meeting up with the three children once they discover the magical kingdom of Narnia. Santa gives each one of the children a gift to assist them in staying safe while they’re in Narnia. Lucy is given a dagger and a special cordial that can heal the sick; Susan is given a bow and arrows, and a special horn that will always bring help when blown; and Peter is given a sword. As Santa’s sleigh departs he looks back and says, “Remember children, these gifts are tools and not toys!”
The first image shows the BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) equation. If you’re like me, seeing something like this is like looking at a website-coder’s computer screen. A feeling of awe overcomes you, and in that moment, you’ll trust absolutely anything you’re told.
What we are so often told is that EPD’s or EBV’s are a science that we need to use as cattle breeders to improve our genetics and in effect an animal’s productivity, a herd’s profitability and a family’s prosperity.
The second image demonstrates what trusting EPDs for the last 36 years has done. In essence, Angus steers in US feedlots are $144 more profitable today than they were in 1980. Big win if you run a feedlot!
Also, the graph shows us that Angus cows are $136 per year more expensive to run today than they were 36 years ago. Big loss if you run a cow/calf operation.
So, if you’re a cow/calf operator who sells weaned calves, you lose $136 so that someone else can make $144. Is this genetic improvement? Or is it just genetic change?
Now, are EPDs science? In Science if two laboratories do the same experiment with the same procedure and ingredients they will always have the same outcome. e.g. If I hold my arm out holding an apple in Texas and my brother in South Africa does the same, and we let go of our apples, they fall to the ground. Every single time. That is science.
If I sell a cow and calf to my neighbor, also a registered Angus breeder, and at weaning the calf is weighed and ratioed with my neighbor’s calves, his EPDs will reflect where he ranked in a contemporary group set up by my neighbor.
If the pair had remained on my side of the fence and been rationed with my calves, his EPDs would reflect where he ranked in a contemporary group set up by myself.
Let’s assume:
My neighbor and I have very different herds in terms of quality and genetics.
My neighbor doesn’t manipulate contemporary groups, I have manipulated contemporary groups to benefit outliers down to an art.
My neighbor and I have the same grass, same nutrition and have had an identical season. We stock at the same rate, using the same herd sizes in each pasture. We use identical vaccinations and supplements given on the same days.
We use the same scale with the same person reading the weights.
So naturally, there should be no difference in the calf’s EPDs -whether he was retained by me or sold to my neighbor in-dam? Correct? Wrong!
There is a 100% chance of these EPDs having different outcomes and therefore EPDs are not Science. Not even close.
I’ll argue that EPDs are an incomplete math equation.
The system makes some incredible assumptions.
1. That breeders all measure and weigh their cattle.
2. That breeders all measure and weigh their cattle accurately.
3. That everybody’s herd is equal. eg. Having a ratio of 100 in herd A is equivalent to having a ratio of 100 in herd B.
4. That contemporary groups are honest and not manipulated.
None of these assumptions are true and yet, we are provided a spread of numbers that we are encouraged to have faith in and are told that they are science.
Even more concerning is that cattle are given values for traits that neither they nor their parents nor offspring have even been measured in.
e.g. Ribeye Area and FAT.
(A remarkably small percentage of cattle with REA and FAT EPDs are actually measured. But they still get EPDs. And if their calves are not measured, they’ll still get EPDs too.)
Please try and follow this logic with me. When I was in high school I didn’t play Chess, but I played Cricket and took History. If there were EPDs for me as a high school student other than direct measurements, like a batting average in Cricket or an Exam score for History, then I could have been given EPDs for Batting and History. What EPDs claim to be allowed to do is to give scores for tests I hadn’t even taken. So even though I didn’t play chess, the formula would give me a chess score based on how I was at Math and Accounting. As it would claim that these two activities correlate. And then also work into my score the fact that I did sports. Chess and sports correlate negatively, so because I was good at sports and poor at math, my Chess EPD would be low.
One generation later, my kids don’t play Chess either, but because I had a poor Chess EPD, even though I never played Chess, they inherit my bad Chess EPD and my wife’s poor EPD for Chess (She did play chess, but at another school, so they don’t take her numbers into account at all).
Is it just me that finds this illogical?
The comment about my wife coming from a different school is what happens to cattle brought in from different countries. Decades of data and performance testing in New Zealand for example translates to nothing if it is exported to the US.
Forgive me for getting technical, but this is clearly not science and certainly not a complete math equation.
But, it is a tool that can work, if used in context and when backed by raw data and an understanding of the herd the animals come from.
If the breeder of the animal measures all the traits that are published as EPDs, has a well managed herd with great data capturing and is honest with his scale and doesn’t manipulate contemporary groups, then yes the EPDs on his animals are a very useful tool. I’ll go as far as to say that one can incorporate these EPDs into your breeding decisions and give them significant weight provided the phenotype and pedigree is sound and of high quality.
When do they become a dangerous toy?
EPDs are an extremely dangerous toy when used out of the aforementioned context.
Using EPDs for marketing cattle for high premiums or publishing EPDs for traits that aren’t measured, or even worse, traits that can’t be measured instead of understanding cattle for what they are and what their purpose is can be very dangerous.
(Traits that can’t be measured like udder scores. You describe an udder score, you don’t measure it. And each score is described by a different person. Science is not described, it is measured).
The second image demonstrates an example of a maternal breed that through genetic progress (genetic change) over 36 years has become a terminal breed. This is almost entirely based on the use of EPDs. The world famous Angus mother cow has now become an average Charolais.
Thankfully though, there is still a remnant of breeders who still breed cattle with common sense and caution. Who use EPDs for what they are and only trust them as much as they trust the cow or bull that produced them. These breeders are the saviors of the industry, who will have good feet, and real tangible muscle and docility and softness when the industry realizes that things got out of hand. We will be forced to turn to the conservative breeders when the “progressive” breeder’s tank runs out of gas.
If I end this here, my phone will erupt with calls and texts from my industry friends and colleagues. What about genomics they’ll say, genomics and GE infused EPDs solves all of this.
That’s why I didn’t end there.
I could have, if genomics was being used as intended by scientific discovery and in their pure unadulterated form. But they’ve been hijacked by promoters and associations.
The mapping of the bovine genome was a remarkable discovery and is real science. This has enabled breeders to identify genes for color, horn status, genetic defects etc. This is all amazing and we should all be grateful for it.
Then we took it one step further, we started identifying genetic markers for the traits that we’re measuring and formulating into EPDs. By combining genomics and conventional EPDs we developed GE-EPDs. It’s like the hybrid car, only more reliable… or so they say.
Doing a 50K or 75K SNP or genomic test on an unproven calf can improve the accuracy of its EPDs for up to the equivalent of it having 7-12 offspring. That is helpful indeed. Not a silver bullet, but better than what we had previously.
Again, it may just be me, but the issue I have with this is the process from where the gene is identified to where it becomes an actual number. So one identifies the gene for marbling and then it becomes a 0.27 marbling score when combined with the raw data (If we’re lucky enough to have any).
There is a magical bridge that transports that genetic marker into the EPD profile. This is a remarkable claim if there ever was one. And remarkable claims require remarkable evidence. In the case of GE-EPDs the evidence is not remarkable at all, it’s absent. The bridge is a bridge requiring a lot of faith.
Oh, but they’ll say, we’ve changed now from the two step system to the one step system. It’s a lot less complicated and saves a lot of time. It may be less complicated, but the bridge is still magical, mysterious and imaginary… unless they can demonstrate it to us in a remarkable way.
If the two-step system was a unicorn, the one-step system is BigFoot.
I would love for this to be true. And if it is demonstrated with remarkable evidence I will become a true believer.
Up until now, fluctuations in individual EPDs, phenotypes which are antagonistic with their own EPDs, and the type of cattle which are produced using full faith in the GE-EPD system are evidence enough to me that this is a dangerous toy, one being used to manipulate unknowing investors into believing that their potential purchase is indeed, scientifically, the best at what it is in the free world. This is cult-like behavior.
Tom Lasater, founder of the Beefmaster breed famously said:
“Breeding cattle is simple. The difficult part is keeping it simple!”
Voila!
ANECDOTE 15
SCIENCE and ART
vs
$CIENCE and ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies)
Cattle breeding is both a SCIENCE and an ART. This concept is often commandeered by $CIENCE and ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies).
Responsible, creative cattle breeders are both scientists and artists. They prove and disprove genetics by treating their operations like laboratories. They observe patterns and repetitions. They truly are as effective as academically trained scientists.
Too often though, corporations with set objectives are sponsoring scientists to do research to confirm their subjective bias. This is not SCIENCE, its $CIENCE and its rampant… in every industry, our’s included.
Responsible, creative cattle breeders are artists too. Creating functional phenotypes by matching complimentary genotypes and economic traits. ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies) are a power tool that when used correctly can be incredibly valuable. However, when used in a cavalier fashion, can be destructive.
Balance should apply when breeding using both ART and ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies).
Remember, genetic change is only genetic gain if it’s going in the right direction. Lightening fast genetic change in the wrong direction is genetic loss.
ANECDOTE 9
In 2019 I took a Trans Ova Genetics colleague of mine, Dr Mark Allan, to Africa with me. We visited several herds in 3 countries, but it was our stop at Ol Pejeta in Nanyuki, Kenya that confirmed my partiality towards functional, adapted cattle.
The Boran cattle in East Africa have undergone natural selection for over 1,100 years. Co-mingling with lion, buffalo, elephant and crocodiles… they have inherited traits which make them incredibly valuable in today’s cattle industry. They have an affinity with man, as the pastoralist and herdsman culture is intertwined with the Boran.
They have a herding instinct which is completely foreign to modern, popular breeds of cattle. If you see one of them, you see all of them.
Boran have exceptionally good feet. They had to be well structured. Cattle with poor structure lagged behind and fell prey to predators.
Their udder quality is unlike any popular breed of cattle today. Largely due to the breed being selected primarily for reproduction for so long, and also, calves that couldn’t get up and nurse soon after being born would be weak enough to be taken by small predators and scavengers.
Wild cattle that strayed from the herd were easy pickings for big cats, so Boran are even tempered within their herds and with their herdsmen.
Testicles of bulls are almost always well shaped and sized and symmetrical. Again, due to being selected primarily for reproduction. Sexual dimorphism in the breed is profound.
Because the cattle are corralled in “bomas” for 12 hours a day, their grazing time is severely inhibited. This has resulted in a breed with easy fleshing ability. Johann Zietsman refers to it as aggravated natural selection.
So, when Dr Mark Allan, witnessed all of this first hand, he was so impressed that he needed to get his mind around the cause of this bovine phenomenon.
Previous Ol’ Pejeta manger and current consultant then landed his small plane to join us for the afternoon. Not dressed like an American cowboy at all. He had on a buttoned up shirt, well barely buttoned up, rugby shorts, and flip flops. As good a cattleman as Giles Prettejohn you’d struggle to find.
So Giles, Mark and I admired the 120 mature Boran bulls grazing near his plane. The quality and uniformity was breathtaking. Fleshing ability, feet, testicles, muscle, masculinity… in every single one.
Still impressed, Dr Mark Allan asked Giles what genetic tools he was using to get his herd to this quality? Giles explained that every time the herds came in to be dipped, they’d look through the cattle. Anything that didn’t look or act like the others got culled to the commercial herds.
Voila! Perhaps we have totally over complicated this business.
CHAPTER XIV
Eat, Walk, Reproduce
These are non-negotiables when selecting your breeding bulls.
A wide muzzle and a strong jaw will enhance foraging ability and indicate skeletal width and strength throughout the body.
Good sized feet with evenly shaped and sized toes are essential for determining longevity. Heel depth and a strong but flexibly cushioned pastern allow for athleticism and foot health. Foot issues are almost always detected as cattle mature, so ensuring that your selection process includes skeletal integrity with sound and angular shoulders, rumps and hind legs will enhance foot quality. These angles are shock absorbers by optimizing flexibility.
Testicle size, shape and suspension is of utmost importance in determining early fertility in livestock as well as guarding against injury.
Functional and angular sheaths with appropriate prepuce and a well formed sphincter muscle will minimize injury during the breeding season. Bulls that prolapse their penises are more subject to insect bites, scratches and injury during the breeding season.
CHAPTER VII
Skull shape is of absolute importance when evaluating cattle.
An animal’s head is the preview of what’s to come in the rest of the body.
Length of skull, width of muzzle, strength of jaw, positioning of the eyes, shape of the ridge/poll, width between the eyes, fleshiness of the jowl, hair texture – all of these aspects are indicators of hormonal balance, maturity pattern, body type, frame, temperament, skeletal width, tenderness, foraging ability and so much more.
There has never been a good bull with a poor head, in the same way in which there has never been a good cow with a bad udder.
ESSAY F
What size should a cow be?
I’ve had a lot of questions after shows or seminars regarding what size a cow should be. This is my answer, and it’s more complex than me just giving you a weight or frame size. If, as a breeder, you really are concerned about producing adapted, functionally efficient cattle – here are some principles to implement.
(Numbers, percentages and timelines below are adaptable. The principle is to implement a system or program).
1. Give your cow herd the nutrition that is generally applied by progressive commercial producers in your area.
2. A heifer must calve for the first time by 27 months old.
3. All females must calve on time, every year.
4. Use a 90 day breeding period.
5. Establish a minimum acceptable weaning weight.
6. Females must wean calves at 7 months old that are at least 45% of their body weight.
7. Only keep the females in your herd that meet all 6 of these requirements every year.
8. Very soon, the size, weight and type of the cows that remain in your breeding herd will be the ideal size for the market and will be adapted to your environment.
ANECDOTE 10
The sacred cows and the dogma that keeps them alive.
In Hindu tradition, cattle are sacred and cattle slaughter is banned in all but two Indian states. With India having by far the largest cattle population of all countries as well as 1,3 billion people, this poses additional challenges. Millions of non-producing cattle are eating a lot of food that could be used in the human food chain.
Fortunately though, in India, the rupee is also sacred, so an illegal, but tolerated, trade of cattle across the border into Bangladesh alleviates the pressure and acts as a solution to the challenges which such belief systems present.
The dogma that surrounds breeds and types within breeds exists worldwide. Breeders become quite jealous of or even religious towards their breeds of choice. This passion or obsession can prove to be valuable as breeders hone their breeding skills and grow market share.
This dogma can also get in the way of progress. Choosing bloodlines or breeds over adaptability, functional-efficiency, fertility and longevity. Losing friends over changing breeds or even horned status or color within breeds.
I maintain that type is so much more important than breed. And good types can be found in most breeds.
I have witnessed this dogma or fundamentalism in all aspects of our industry. Grass fed beef vs grain fed beef, regenerative agriculture vs conventional agriculture, ultra-high intensity grazing vs traditional pasture rotation.
Is it not better to read and learn about all these methods and philosophies, to have many teachers, to avoid tribalism.
For the sake of profitability and keeping farmers on the land, the proverbial sacred cows need to be slaughtered.
ANECDOTE 16
Has CAB being good for the US Beef cattle industry?
Certified Angus Beef (CAB) has been more influential in changing the way that Americans enjoy eating beef than any other project before or since. And the ripple efffects are global. Angus equals quality in the psyche of consumers worldwide. CAB has redefined carcass quality and the American red meat industry. All of this has been for the good!
But, there’s a dark side to CAB too.
When dining in a New York City steakhouse, the CAB Prime ribeye you’re eating, might well be Purebred Limousin x Jersey, or any other imaginable combination. CAB’s constitution states that cattle simply have to be predominantly black and polled. CAB’s name, however, Certified Angus Beef, hoodwinks the consumer into believing that what they’re consuming is Certified and is Angus. This is a misrepresentation of product at the grandest level. Ironically, the sire of your CAB steak could be anything from Limousin, Simmental, Gelbvieh, Mashona, Galloway, South Devon, Maine-Anjou, Chianina, Brangus, you name it… but it can’t be Red Angus… the other color of Angus is a no no!
The other dark sire of CAB and the AAA (American Angus Association) is that they have lured producers in the South East USA into believing that Angus and other black bos taurus cattle are worth raising as their calves garner a premium when sold at weaning or as fat cattle. This is true, however, because of this, the number of heat stressed, unadapted, tropically degenerated cattle in the US is unlike anywhere else on earth. CAB has sured up their supply chain. AAA has built a platform for Angus bulls to be used all over the South Eastern USA. The packers get richer while the producers get poorer.
The third dark side is how, in subtle ways, such as running hard on the $Beef Index (Growth, Muscle, Marbling) and rewarding leaner cattle in AAA genetic evaluations, CAB and the AAA have facilitated a crossover from the Angus cow being a supreme maternal, foraging bovine into a terminal animal resembling a mono-gastric. This has made feed-lotters and packers wealthy and producers all over the United States poorer.
CHAPTER II
If you believe that the average cow in the breed is big enough, then logically, breed average for Yearling Weight EPD is sufficient.
Optimum > Maximum (If your objective is sustainable profitability).
This applies to all traits and aspects of livestock production.
CHAPTER I
When analyzing the $ Indexes – bear in mind which link in the value chain will profit from that specific $ Index.
If it’s not the cow/calf producer, then you may need to shift emphasis off of that Specific $ Index (Unless you’re part of a program that benefits you substantially).
Charity begins at home. Make your selections using traits that are profitable for the cow/calf producer. The rest of the links in the value chain are pretty good taking care of themselves.
ESSAY C
Royal Show Gold Cup Dinner Speech 2012
Good-evening ladies and gentlemen, show organizers, volunteer workers, exhibitors,
judges, stewards, spectators and the loyal families who support us crazy people in
doing what we so love to do.
The Royal Show truly is a unique experience in South Africa. It encapsulates the
character, passion and persistence of rural South Africans and celebrates all of this in
a chic and professional way. It brings together industry leaders, attracts new-comers
and sets the stage for everybody to win from the experience. I love this show and it’s
an honor to for me to speak at this event!
Chris Purdon, when embarking on the adventure of becoming a Red Angus stud-
breeder 25 years ago toured the United States and ended up visiting with Jim
Leachman in Billings, Montana. Jim Leachman asked him why he wanted to do this
with his life… explaining that “being in the registered cattle business is like being a
country dawg in the city! If ya stand they’ll screw ya… and if ya run, they’ll bite you
in the ass.”
My cricket coach at Rhodes University, Mr Craig Hoyer, used to tell us that “you can
buy chips and coke, but you can’t buy experience!”
So then, what is a youngster from a small Karoo town doing addressing a crowd of
seasoned campaigners and telling them that they’ve actually taken the high road in
doing what they do.
Not sure, but what I do know is that the same animal breeding bug that bit all of you
at some stage must have bitten me at the moment of conception… and I have no
intention of curing it.
We are indeed a small remnant of people with a massive mandate… to feed the
world!
Tonight I’d like to paint a picture based on what I’ve been blessed to see and
experience in 19 countries around the world as well as to illustrate how important it is
for us as pre-primary producers to become even more productive, more profitable and
ultimately more prosperous.
Tonight, I will divide a cattle breeding program into 8 different divisions… similar
principles would apply to small stock, poultry, pig, horse and dairy farming.
I will suggest the consideration of using specialists in each of these divisions to
optimize success. I understand that specialists come either with large price-tag or an
obligation to purchase their product, but when one uses a specialist, one eventually
becomes a specialist. I also understand the inherent nature of a farmer to be a jack-of-
all-trades and king of his castle. Using a specialist in your program doesn’t
dethrone one as king though, it just sets you up to enlarge the size of your kingdom.
The ancient cities of Israel and the Roman Empire were completely walled in. They
would have several gates that were used for different purposes. Some for trade, some
for pedestrians, some for royalty, some for chariots etc etc. Each gate had a gate-
keeper who would view the world outside the city from the gate and periodically all
the gate keepers would gather and report back on what was going on in the world
around them from the perspective of their specific gates. Only once each gate-keeper
had given their report could the cities leaders have a complete perspective of the state
of their city and immediate surrounds.
Our farms are not unlike these ancient cities… we too are fenced in and need to be
self sufficient. Our gates would be the different divisions that make up our complete
program… our gate-keepers, potentially the specialists we use to update us on the
state of each division.
The first division for a beef cattle farmer, in no particular order, would be
GENETICS. There are many different aids to assist us in our genetic programs.
Our breed societies, performance testing schemes, leading breeders, scientists and
agricultural institutions all act as helpful tools in building our knowledge as
cattlemen.
My experience has been that South Africa’s registered cattle fair extremely well
compared to the rest of the world as far as quality, structural soundness and efficiency
are concerned. Our challenge is that we have far too many breeds and a lack of belief
in the power of heterosis or hybrid vigor amongst our commercial beef producers.
The challenge is for our Agricultural Media and Institutions to promote cross-
breeding systems that have had global success and to report in an educative way to the
industry what heterosis is, how to utilize it and to stress that re-inventing the wheel is
archaic, following fads is a waste of time and that many of our existing breeds are 1 to
4 century old institutions which have proven to be fool-proof when used in structured
cross-breeding programs. In Argentina, for example, there are 50-60 million cattle.
Their entire beef industry runs on 6 breeds… why do we then need 45 breeds for our
10 million cattle? They also fully understand the roles each breed needs to play…
whether a bull is bred to be a terminal sire, a heat tolerant, tick resistant sire or an
animal more suited to the temperate areas. Climatically, Argentina is very similar to
South Africa. Scientifically, what works there ought to work here too. Phenotype,
Pedigree, Performance and Breeding Values are four tools that can assist us in making
the right genetic selections… history has shown that a bias towards any of these four
can be dangerous… however using them proportionately can achieve rapid progress.
Us as cattle producers can learn so much from the chicken and pig industries. By
using science and logic these industries have created a uniform product that when
produced under proven selection and management systems, is able to maximize
potential productivity. So therefore blending two pure strains and then breeding the
F1 offspring to a terminal sire is as simple to the chicken and pig industries as a two-
times-table is to a mathematician. Universities around the world have proven the same
to be true for beef cattle. Our challenge is to get our universities to publish these
papers and get them to our agricultural media houses in order to make this science
available to beef producers
The second division would be HERD MANAGEMENT. Yes, the best fertilizer a
pasture can ever receive is the footprints of the farmer. Structured programs and
carefully designed systems ensure that no stone is left unturned. Short calving-
seasons, timely weaning of calves, when to calve, at what age to mate heifers, at what
age to cull old cows, how many cows to mate per bull, dehorning, whether to castrate
or not, and such issues are all pivotal in moving your herd into an easy to handle,
efficient system. Good working facilities make it easier to work ones cattle more often
which ultimately reduces issues. On a working stint in North Dakota in the United
States I was left in charge of the calving barn. The first six weeks had temperatures
varying between a low of -41 celsius and a high of -1 celsius. It was here that I truly
learned the value of record keeping… we would draft cows close to calving into a
barn every night and do shifts through the night. Every calf that was born would be
tagged, weighed, given drugs for lung infection and the cow would get an udder
score. Calves born on very cold nights would be dragged into a heating pen to thaw
out… the next morning they were back out on the frozen winter pasture. Cows with
inferior udders would be bred to terminal sires or culled. Cows that calved twins
would have a twin taken away and re-attached to a cow that had lost her calf in order
to keep all cows in production through the summer. This was done with 1200
registered and commercial cows by me and two brothers. This continuous interaction
with the herd and accurate record keeping is one of the reasons why they managed to
maintain such incredible uniformity and structural integrity in their herd. If beef
producers start paying more attention to their management practices they will be less
affected as profit margins tighten and the industry starts purging its less profitable
producers. In the registered cattle business most of us do this already. It’s our mandate
to encourage such practices amongst our commercial clients.
These first two divisions were pretty much where my knowledge of a beef program
started and ended 10 years ago. I realized this all early in life and therefore felt the
need get professional advice and service from people it’s strengths lay in the other
six divisions.
The third division would be NUTRITION. Whether it be licks, supplements or full
blown fattening rations there are specialists waiting to assist us with programs to
suit our specific environments and requirements. I fed by trial and error and what
friends and neighbors had told me for a few years which caused headaches and
heartaches that I could have avoided from the start had I simply got a nutritionist to
draw up a program for me and link it to the best recommended products in our
area.
The fourth division would be VETERINARY. I lost animals to tick borne diseases
when starting out that a) should never have gotten sick in the first place and b) could
have been easily saved – had I sat down with a good local vet, and drawn up a
veterinary program for the herd with recommended products. One is always
grateful for using preventative measures. These measures save money, save time and
save lives.
The fifth division would be SALES & MARKETING. Globally, farmers are
generally price takers. We as pre-primary or seed-stock producers have the ability to
define our own reality. We also have the opportunity to research what the industry
needs and then produce it instead of producing what we like and then trying to
convince everybody else to buy it.
– Investors are looking to invest in something other than the stock-markets… we need
to make our registered cattle industry more attractive than breeding buffaloes and
sable antelope.
– I was in Paraguay last month where I attended a registered cattle auction which
through its celebratory style, attracted investment from everyone whether a small
commercial farmer, a night-club owner or a cattle-baron with 95000 cows.
I was later told that this is simply how registered cattle sales work in South America.
The event starts at 9pm with a sit down 3-course-meal, waiters bringing wine around,
steaks cooked to perfection, branded with their breed’s logo on. There is a DJ playing.
At 11pm the lights go out and a heifer is led into the sale ring. Neon disco lights shine
down on the heifer exposing the glitter sprinkled all over her… just before the
auctioneer begins the DJ starts up again and a smoke machine blows smoke into the
ring. Ring-men shout Ole after every bid and the crowd claps louder and louder as the
bids escalate. Cattle are all sold in 10 month installments. The seller pays a 4%
commission and the buyer a 4% commission. These installments encourage higher
prices as it is far easier to pay off these high-profile cattle monthly. The final and
feature lot comes in the ring at about 1:30 am. I am delighted that BKB is here tonight
as they can start getting tips for our sale in August. Although getting Tarkastad
farmers to eat a steak at 9pm is possible… to still be bidding at 1:30 in the morning is
unlikely. Perhaps one needs some latin blood pulsing through one’s veins to pull this
off… or perhaps these are some ideas worth thinking about… as one of the older
Paraguayan farmers said to me… cattle is our life… so we have to celebrate it.
– An interesting figure raised at the congress in Asuncion, Paraguay was that the
average South African middle to upper class dinner/braai sees 125 grams of red-meat
budgeted per person including woman and children. In Paraguay they budget 500g of
beef per person including women and children. China consumes 1.5kg of red meat per
person per year… it used to be 500g. Should this figure move to 2.5kg of red meat per
year with their swelling middle class… it would require a new beef population the
size of Brazil’s just to sustain this 1kg per person growth. This is a good time to be in
the cattle business.
Keeping bull prices moderate is very important to sustaining one’s market. South
African farmers have a leaning towards being bush breeders or keeping their heaviest
weaner every year. By keeping bulls affordable we give them less reason to do this.
Once hybrid vigor kicks in they’ll be prepared to pay more for good genetics. If
one’s sale becomes too expensive, it may be time to put more bulls on the sale.
Globally the selling of F1 females on production sales is proving to be more profitable
than bulls, registered females, embryos or even semen. The power of the F1 female is
being realized and people are paying for the potential.
The sixth division would be AGRI FINANCE & ECONOMICS. When I look at a
balance sheet, budget, cash flow chart, stock market etc etc… I get the same sensation
as I would from looking inside a cars engine… I first go blank and then I get dizzy.
But there are phenomenal Agricultural Financial Specialists in the Industry who can
read these charts like you and I look through our cow herds… using these specialists
is a life-saver to so many producers.
The seventh division would be PASTURE DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT.
Here too, using specialists can be vital in cutting costs, preventing failures and
increasing profit. I once flew two pasture specialists to our Mauritian herd for a few
days… it wasn’t cheap, but in the first 20 minutes they identified a poisonous plant in
our pasture and our losses in our imported cattle stopped as soon as we had chopped
these plants out. The cost of 1 ½ heifers paid for the trip to get them there… I’ll never
know how much they actually saved us… but I’m guessing it’s a monumental
amount.
The eighth division would be HUMAN CAPITAL. This part of ones business is as
vitally important as any of the other 7. When this division isn’t functioning, even if
the other 7 are humming… things will never seem worth it and the fruits of ones
labour wont taste very good.
The term, Human Capital, simply emphasizes that there is actually a financial value
that can be placed on the way in which you utilize your greatest assets… the people
you live and work with. South Africa is a complicated country and I certainly don’t
know all the answers. What I do know though is that people function better when they
are part of a team; when they understand their value, their role and their strengths.
People need a purpose and need vision. What Human Capital do we as beef producers
have to deal with?
– Father and Son relationships (The difference in generational ideas and
accessible technology)
– Employers and Employees (Are our staff really team players, are they part of
the vision, or are they just salaried workers.)
– Neighbors (Communication between neighbors and co-operating and
planning together make and save money)
– Suppliers (Building goodwill and trust)
– Clients
– Green Peace and animal rights activists (Keeping communications open with
these activist groups will make us better farmers and help them understand
how much we really do care for our animals… this spill over eventually makes
us more profitable as well)
There’s an old country song which has lyrics that go… walk a mile in my shoes…
these lyrics rang true this week after three full days of showing in gumboots.
Organizers and breeders love the look of the color-coded handlers in the rings…
walking around, blending into the scenery, wearing the most uncomfortable shoes and
boiling hot overalls… I’d suggest we open up this conversation too… leather boots,
navy jeans, a blue cotton shirt and a breed-specific vest would look smarter and be far
more comfortable… but that’s just my perspective as a handler.
So too sum this all up… our farms are like an ancient city… with eight gates… each
gate has a gate-keeper, who sees the world from the perspective of his specific gate.
Only when the gate-keepers of each gate get together do we get the full picture.
– If we try and master and do everything on our own we not only deny someone
else on our team from fulfilling their strengths, but we also make it very
difficult for our operations to grow. We really can cover all our bases with
help from others.
– If we would like to ultimately become more productive, more profitable and
more prosperous, we need to ensure that the entire industry is too. The more
people we leave behind, the more people can drag us down.
– The more we use specialists the more we ourselves become specialists in each
division.
– We are all part of the same industry; we produce an animal protein called beef.
Let us promote this product together… the chicken and pig produces don’t
politic about breeds and fads… they use science and logic and get it done!
– We as seed-stock producers are on the very point of an arrow which is fast
gaining momentum… for many years beef cattle breeders have been the tail of
the mouse… statistics suggest that we are set to become the head of the lion!
ANECDOTE 11
Some of the best “accidental” genetic advice I ever heard.
John Eales, captain of the 1999 Rugby World Cup winning Wallabies, gave the keynote at the 2025 World Angus Forum.
He made two points that I wish all the other speakers at the forum had taken note of.
He didn’t even know how profound it was, genetically speaking. He was referring to leadership and sport.
He stated that “many things are measurable, but that doesn’t make them all meaningful. “
Something that should be stressed every time a new EPD/EBV or Index is developed.
The second statement was profound. He said that the job of a leader is to “take a complex issue, simplify it then make it compelling.”
Why do so animal scientists and geneticists do the exact opposite of this? They take a simple issue, complicate it and make it confusing.”
I truly hope that John Eales’ words penetrated into the psyche of at least some of the 800 Angus breeders and enthusiasts in attendance. The rest of the speakers did everything they could to genomically enhance the crowd.
ANECDOTE 4
The Human Flourishing Value Chain
PRESERVE
It is essential that we preserve the farming and ranching way or life and way of making a living. The reasons why are addressed in Anecdote 3
PERSEVERE
It takes tremendous strength to persevere through droughts, floods, fires, fluctuating markets, famines, wars and political policies
PRODUCE
Adaptability + Functional Efficiency + Fertility + Longevity = Profitability
PROFIT
Productive livestock create profitable businesses and profitable businesses create prosperous communities.
PROSPER
Prosperous communities decentralize wealth, power and influence and increase happiness and human flourishing
CHAPTER VI
Heifer Bulls are an unnecessary and harmful construct.
Generational selection for performance outliers has created sexual monomorphism.
Selecting for maximum growth and muscle requires the propagation of growth hormones over sex hormones.
This creates a population of bulls and females that are shaped and sized very similarly. The bulls become slightly feminine and the females slightly masculine. Sexual monomorphism changes the physiology of mammals.
On the contrary, when selecting for reproduction first and breeding livestock with optimal growth, milk and muscle, sexual dimorphism occurs. This is a natural mammalian state, where bulls and females look nothing alike. By propagating sex hormones over growth hormones, bulls become masculine and muscular. Bulls are significantly larger and coarser than their female relatives. Females with optimized estrogen flow are full bodied, easy-fleshing and shaped functionally.
Sex hormones are only released at full throttle once ossification of the long bones has taken place and the growth hormones are suppressed. Excessively heavy boned cattle will naturally be sub-fertile as bone length and width is propagated by growth hormones.
Populations of cattle where sexual dimorphism is fully realized will naturally be easy calving, free of dystocia and genetically fertile.
When selecting your breeding bulls, masculine, well muscled, early maturing, easy fleshing bulls will be adequate to breed to both cows and heifers. (Provided your cows and heifers are feminine, easy fleshing and early maturing).
If none of this makes sense, observe a herd of bison, buffalo, antelope or deer during the breeding season. There’s no team talk before the males head out to breed females. There’s no splitting up the alpha males from the beta males for the purpose of going easy on the virgins.
If your cowherd is functional, your heifers can safely be bred to the same bull as you’d use on your cows.
CHAPTER VIII
Mum’s the Word
An essential part of the selection process is to evaluate the dam of the bull you’re buying.
– Study her calving record
– Make sure that she has a good, functional udder
– She must be feminine and maternal
– She needs to be easy fleshing and full bodied
– Temperament is not just a convenience trait, it’s a profit trait
– Skeletal structure and foot quality are essential for longevity
The dam is responsible for 50% of the bull’s nuclear DNA and 100% of the bull’s mitochondrial DNA.
ESSAY E
Livestock Marketing in the 21st Century
Buying and selling cattle in 2024 is more advanced and more dynamic than anyone could have imagined even 10 years ago. This is a great thing. There are so many mediums and tools available to enable producers to merchandize and source genetics to and from anywhere.
Through pictures, videos, smartphone applications and online auction platforms we can increase an auction attendance one hundred fold. This is very positive.
In an industry as dynamic as livestock marketing has become, it is very difficult to avoid excess. This is a trend found in any fast moving human driven phenomenon. Opportunities for this excess are usually a sign that the industry is vibrant. These excesses are found in all aspects of society. Just consider political systems, religious organizations and flourishing industries. Where things are really growing, manipulation, embellishment and greed become a natural by-product.
On the other hand, if there’s no growth or success, the excess becomes a lack, and this is a much more difficult problem to address.
I, myself, have been complicit or guilty and one or another stage in my career of most of the examples I’ll discuss in this article. In one way or another, we probably all are or have been. So this is kitchen table discussion. A thought experiment amongst family.
Personally, I don’t like that auctioneers are compared with lawyers, taxi drivers and politicians. I hosted over a decade of on-property bull sales and we had a tremendous relationship with the livestock marketing company we worked with. There are so many honest marketers and auctioneers out there, that it is a shame that a level of distrust for the industry affects the way even they are perceived. It is unfortunate that honest and professional lawyers, taxi drivers and politicians are also tarred with the same brush as their dishonest colleagues.
We do have a few unfortunate blind spots in our industry though. And it is necessary to address them, because every other industry has and does.
The auction block is essential for creating an atmosphere conducive to fast bidding and creating higher premiums. As sellers, we love this. As people attending the sale for the experience, this is amazing. But there are some habits that have become cultural norms in our industry that I would argue don’t belong.
Auctioneers taking bids from barn windows and wooden beams is wrong. I have a close friend who suggests that all this does is determine a true market value on the day. He argues that no-one is forcing the prospective buyer to keep bidding. I understand his point, but I don’t agree with him at all. If the auctioneer sat with the buyer after the sale and explained to him what he’d just done to him earlier to make him pay $1000, $5000 or $25000 more, what would the reaction of the buyer be? There are various different possible outcomes. Some of which include being sued, going to jail or being forced out of the industry. I’ve witnessed this happening. It just took an outsider wanting to get in to see that this practice is criminal. Which it truly is if paralleled with other industries. There is a legal loophole in some countries in which false bids may be used to reach fair market value. Because it’s legal, still doesn’t make it right.
Reporting sales of large sums of money when no money or a fraction of the money has changed hands is a very useful way in promoting genetic programs, boosting sale averages or marketing the offspring of the high seller. Can you imagine if this happened in the real estate industry? Your neighbor sells his home for $150 000 and the realtor reports it as $300 000. The ramifications for the neighborhood are huge. So a harmless act of trying to boost egos, sale reports and future sales can have unexpected consequences. And, more than that, it’s just wrong. It’s called lying.
When an auctioneer no-sales a lot by claiming that the buyer is X ranch, far away, I’m sure he means no harm at all. It’s become such a cultural norm, I’ve even heard of auctioneers thanking buyer X for his support. The fact that the buyer doesn’t exist, or is just someone who would have likely been buying that type of lot had he been there makes this a disturbing trend. I understand that this is a smoother way to run a sale than announcing that lots are not sold and then asking them to leave the ring. The easiest and most efficient way to handle these situations is to lie to the crowd by telling them that the animal is in fact sold. And then expecting them to be understanding when they find out afterwards that there are a dozen lots that didn’t sell and they’re all still available.
I was once scolded by an auctioneer in Minnesota. A lot was sold to a friend of mine. I called the friend and congratulated him. He didn’t know about it. The auctioneer was angry with me, saying that everyone but me knew that my friend hadn’t actually bought the lot.
The easy and most effective way has become modus operandi. How can you argue with that?
Below are five ways to make a sandwich.
1. Become a wheat farmer, harvest the wheat, bake bread, make a sandwich.
2. Buy wheat, grind it into flour, bake bread, make a sandwich.
3. Buy bread, make a sandwich.
4. Buy a sandwich at the store.
5. Go into the store and steal a sandwich.
Option 5 is clearly the easiest, cheapest and most efficient. But it’s wrong. We can’t justify wrong in the Livestock Marketing industry by arguing that it’s the most efficient way.
Manipulating pictures of sale animals by changing body structure and shape through computer programs is fraud. This was tolerated for a long time, but the industry is becoming wise to it. There is no good argument for it. Livestock publications knowingly publishing articles and advertisements with manipulated profile pictures is an interesting concept. Are they just publishing a manipulated phenotype on behalf of the advertiser? Would they be as comfortable in publishing a knowingly false genotype (EPD/EBV) on behalf of an advertiser?
Manipulating contemporary groups or fabricating weights and measures to bolster EPDs/EBVs can be penny-wise but it’s pound-foolish as it compromises the entire database. This practice has been normalized to where breeders often don’t even hide the fact that they build contemporary groups to benefit their superior individuals even more. They find that sacrificing the lower end animals is worth it in the long run. This is just ego and greed and the industry loses in the end.
I love reading footnotes in sale books, and then the additional spice given to those footnotes from the auction block. The eloquence of the way in which the adjectives build expressive sentences. The remarkable claims of greatness and uniqueness. And then the misrepresentation of facts. The poetry is fine, but I’d argue for dialing the emotion and adjectives down to 1, and dialing the facts up to 10. We have so much at our disposal that is actually helpful to buyers. Pedigrees, Ratios, EPDs, Performance Records, Show Records are all at our disposal and are actually useful.
Submitting false calving dates to create an illusion of phenotypic performance is becoming commonplace in several countries. In some cases it’s akin to Lance Armstrong’s doping scandal where almost every cyclist in the Tour de France was doing the same thing. These practices are harmful to the reputation of our industry. This compromises the integrity of the show cattle industry.
Misinformation has crept into beef marketing schemes too. Sometimes in the most subtle ways. Certified Angus Beef (CAB) in the USA is the most powerful beef brand in the world. Along with some phenotype requirements, calves just need to meet the required carcass specifications to qualify. Red Angus “logically” doesn’t qualify for the scheme as the American Angus Association doesn’t represent Red Angus breeders. But a couple on a Valentine’s Day date in New York, ordering a CAB Prime Ribeye truly believe they’re treating themselves to Angus. In all honesty, they could be eating a Limousin x Jersey steak as tens of thousands of Limousin/Jersey calves qualify for CAB each year. These consumers are always perplexed and confused when it s revealed to them that what they thought they were consuming isn’t even close to what it is merchandised as. Does the American Angus Association represent Limousin and Jersey breeders? Or, is it fair for the Registered Angus Breeders who have paid to market the greatest breed-specific Beef Brand in History to see the benefits of their investment being realized by breeders and buyers of well, just about any animal that’s black hided and polled?
I am obsessed with the global cattle industry. I love bull sales and cattle shows. I love the vast swath of selection tools at our disposal. I love Angus cattle and I’m a massive consumer of CAB. There isn’t a breed of cattle or national cattle industry that I don’t have admiration for or interest in. But, as an industry, we’re so good at, often correctly, pointing out the corruption in our capital cities, the moral degradation on the entertainment industry and the flaws in our urban cultures. Until we address these afore mentioned issues, our cow palaces are glass houses.
The investors in the Livestock industry are the ones that allow it to be as dynamic and progressive as it is. Thankfully, the industry is full of honest practitioners and a lot of these examples are the exception and not the rule. Let’s treat buyers and investors with the respect and honesty they deserve. Let’s not bite the hand that feeds us. Let’s shake that hand and make that handshake mean what society still hopes it represents.
ANECDOTE 1
The customer is always right.
This phrase slides of the tongue so naturally you’d swear it’s gospel.
But is it true? Is the customer always right? In the cattle industry, the ultimate customer is the consumer. Two links before the consumer are retailers and wholesalers. The processor, who in Northern America, takes the lion’s share of the profit, is the customer of the feedlots who are the customers of the stockers who are the customers of the cow/calf producers.
Let’s linger of the processors for a moment. Their ability to be wildly profitable also makes them incredibly powerful. It affords them power and influence to lobby politically, sponsor research, industry events and fund breed association activities.
In a lot of ways, what they say, goes. Their demands of the players further down the value chain are very specific. They know exactly what makes them money, and they all but demand it. But is the customer always right? The product they’re insisting upon creates a less profitable scenario for whose neighbors and especially for cow/calf producers. They thrive of leaner, later maturing genotypes where cow/calf producers need earlier maturing/easier fleshing genotypes in order to be sustainable.
So cow/calf producers really should step into line and march to the beat of a distant and centralized drum. But, what if the customer is not always right?
In India, it is an all too common occurrence for the poor and homeless people to beg for money and food on street corners. The Indian population are generally extremely generous and keep this industry going by being charitable.
In this scenario, the customer is the Indian public and the service provider is the beggar. There’s a premium paid for beggars holding young children or babies. Even better if the children beg without an adult in sight.
The Apple-product is when a child is begging who is blind or maimed.
This has led to the evil practice of children being deliberately blinded or maimed in order to harvest more charity money for their masters.
Now, after that happy story, I am trying to use that anecdote to make a point. We do not have to handicap our nations’ cowherds in order to please the packers/processors. They’re not right about their demands of cow/calf producers and they will purchase product regardless of whether it fits their specs. Even if they don’t pay their premiums or even if they dock product, adapted, functionally efficient, fertile herds with functional longevity will remain the most profitable and sustainable option regarding keeping farmers and ranchers in business and on their land.
ANECDOTE 13
There are really good cattle all over the world. After visiting 122 countries and working with livestock in just about every environment, I’ve seen genotypes and phenotypes that would be so effective in similar areas in different countries.
For example, Boran cattle would be well suited to the South Eastern USA. Argentinian and Uruguayan genetics would be suited to almost all temperate and sub-tropical regions. Chinese beef producers are craving good genetics.
Government bureaucracies around the world have blocked access for their own producers to a lot of these available tools. The reasons given are always sanitary, the reasons being are always political. Trade barriers which hurt their own producers more than anything.
Consider this, embryos harvested in quarantine and washed in trypsin cannot transmit disease. That’s the science. However, almost every country has some form of barrier when it comes to semen and embryos. Imagine if governments were interested in serving their constituents.
Some of the reasons are purely protectionist. Ironic that the United States wrote the book on free trade, but in cases like this, it seems that they haven’t read it yet.
CHAPTER IX
Pigment is not just a bonus, it really is important.
Pigmentation around the eyes, on the scrotum, udder and teats of white faced cattle is an important way of reflecting harsh infra-red light and dealing with ultraviolet light, especially at high altitude.
If we expect our cows to be productive into their teens, the least that we can do as breeders is give them a pair of sunglasses to wear!
When it comes to photosensitivity from consuming poisonous plants, white on an animal is a hazard. The non-pigmented areas peel and cause intense pain if shade is not immediately available – this can lead to death.
So mascara, eye-liner or designer sunglasses are not just cosmetic when it comes to cattle, it’s essential in a lot of climates and environments.
Eye banks or a hooded eye is extremely important too, but doesn’t negate the need for pigmentation. It’s like a good diet and exercise, you need both to stay healthy. They’re not mutually exclusive, but rather essential together.
CHAPTER X
If you’re located in the tropics or subtropics, and humidity and insects are a challenge, then it’s absolutely essential for cattle to be tropically adaptable.
Adaptability is the gateway trait into profitability through functional efficiency.
There is a smorgasbord of traits that enable tropical adaptability. There is no single silver bullet.
– Body type is important. Ruminants in the tropics are built differently to ruminants in temperate areas.
– Extra hide means more sweat glands. This allows heat to dissipate effectively. Bos Indicus cattle have more sweat glands per square inch than Bos Taurus cattle.
– Bos Indicus cattle have the ability to move a subcutaneous muscle to shake off external parasites in a specific area. This saves the energy it takes to use their tails and tongues to do the same job.
– Bos Indicus cattle secrete sebum in much larger quantities than Bos Taurus cattle. Sebum acts as an insect repellent and a sunscreen.
– Color is important. Lighter colors reflect infrared light. Black absorbs infrared light. The difference in surface temperature is significant on hot summer’s days. This can affect functionality and profitability. Black is an effective color in temperate areas and is useful at altitude as black can make good use of ultraviolet rays.
– A slick haired animal reflects light better and does a better job of detaching external parasites. Hairy cattle without a lot of hide tend to tropically generate and become dysfunctional in tropical and humid subtropical climates.
When defining your breeding program’s objectives, calculating resources is key, but understanding the limits that your environment provides is paramount.
It’s a lot more economical to adapt the cow to the environment than it is to adapt the environment to the animal.
ANECDOTE 2
The “ad populum” fallacy is often used in our industry in promoting why a bull or a breed or a bloodline is superior. This fallacy is also known as the “appeal to popularity” or “bandwagon fallacy”.
This fallacy often appears in debates on ethics, politics, science or marketing where “everyone’s doing it” is used to justify an action without substantive proof.
The Backstreet Boys were the world’s best selling music act in 1999. Does this make them the best musicians in the world in that calendar year? Maybe? Maybe not, but not because they were popular.
Same concept can be used for most popular breeds of cattle, most used AI sires or when the calving season starts for most breeders.
In order to promote and idea or a concept, lets use logic and facts instead of appealing what the current trend is.
ANECDOTE 3
Farmers are the real heroes. This is not me being a cheerleader, even though I am one. I’m a raving fan!
Farmers are the real heroes for several tangible reasons.
1. Food security – 1% of the population of Northern America (Bermuda, Canada, Greenland, Saint Pierre and Miquelon and United States of America) are farmers or ranchers. That means that 1% feeds 100%. That is superhero status.
2. Farmers and Ranchers decentralize power all over the world. People tend to try and move from centralized countries to decentralized countries. This decentralization from one or two major centers allows small rural communities across the country to flourish. It is only farmers and ranchers that enable these small rural towns to flourish with wealth, influence and culture. Decentralization is an antidote to tyranny.
3. National Security – In large countries where vast tracts of land have sparse human inhabitance, it is farmers and ranchers that act as witnesses. Without these farms, there’s no reason for cellphone signal, road networks or electrical infrastructure. A country could be invaded by an enemy state or criminal enterprises if isn’t for these witnesses.
4. As preservers of culture and ultimate conservationists, farmers and ranchers are stewards of land and man and beast. Yes, they are the real heroes.
CHAPTER XVI
Breed societies/associations by their very nature and character are governments. They have governors (CEOs and Boards) and they have constituents (Members) who pay tax (fees) to remain in good standing as constituents.
In my opinion, a breed society has 3 key objectives and mandates.
1. Keep Records
2. Grow Market Share for the Breed/Brand
3. Organise Events
Staff and boards were designed to serve at the discretion of their members.
Corruption occurs when societies partake in mission creep to go beyond these three mandates. Power becomes seductive and the staff and board assume prominence over the members themselves.
When breed societies gain a majority market share in their countries or regions, they move from being governments to becoming empires. Empires, by their very nature, are arrogant. When an empire becomes arrogant, its constituents become subjects. This is TYRANNY.
CHAPTER XV
Humanity progresses through conversation. An organization or community that doesn’t allow ideas to compete becomes dogmatic and stagnant.
In this chapter I’ll discuss a few examples of logical fallacies that have crept into the cattle industry. It’s helpful to recognize these language transgressions and to avoid allowing them to establish themselves in meaningful conversations.
Number 1
Ad Hominem (Playing the Man)
If the subject of the discussion is about what size a cow should be, and the counter argument is “Has this guy ever owned a cow?” then this is a classic example of an ad hominem attack. The question is valid, but not in the context of this specific conversation if used as a counter argument.
Number 2
Red Herring (Dragging a dead fish across the path of hunting dogs on a scent)
If the subject of the discussion is about why eye-pigmentation is important in white-faced cattle’s ability to combat harsh infra-red rays, the counter point is “Herefords with too much pigment lack breed character!” This is a classic example of a red herring. The point of the counter argument is valid, but it has nothing to do with the discussion itself.
Number 3
Straw Man (Misrepresenting the intention or facts of an argument in-order to build a counter argument)
If the subject of the discussion is that bulls sold exclusively to be bred to heifers is an unnecessary and harmful construct, and the counterpoint is “Good luck breeding your heifers to a terminal sire!” This is a classic example of a straw man argument. The counter point makes sense, but the facts have been built outside of the content of the argument and are therefore totally irrelevant.
Number 4
False Equivalence (Comparing Apples with Oranges)
If the subject of the discussion is that black hided cattle absorb more light and are therefore more susceptible to heat stress in the tropics and subtropics, and the counterpoint is “Cattle with shiny black coats reflect more light than cattle with hairy red coats, so hide-color is irrelevant in cattle!” then this is a classic example of false equivalence. Comparing shiny black hair-coats with hairy red hair-coats is not comparing apples with apples.
Number 5
Ad Populum Fallacy (Appeal to Authority)
If the subject of the discussion is that fertility as a trait is highly heritable, and the counterpoint is “Dr Doolittle PhD says that it’s lowly heritable, so it must be!” then this is a classic example of an ad populum fallacy. A way to counter the point is with a fact or countering view and not with an appeal to authority. A contemporary example of this would be “Trust the Science” – Fauci, 2020.
Number 6
Relative Privation
When one uses the very best example from a herd/breed/management practice and compares it with the very worst of a competing herd/breed/management practice, then this is an example of relative privation.
Number 7
Appeal to Tradition
If the subject of the discussion is that calving in May/June is suitable in North Dakota, and the counterpoint is “All the prominent registered herds in the Dakotas calve in February!” then this is a classic example of appealing to tradition. Justin Bieber has been recording music for almost three decades, that does not make his music good or better.
Number 8
Circular Reasoning
The USA produces more beef than any other country in the world. Angus is numerically the largest beef breed in the USA. Therefore, Angus must be the best beef breed because it is the most dominant in the largest market. I am a huge fan of functional Angus cattle, but the circular reasoning above reaches a conclusion falsely by using circular reasoning.
Let’s keep communicating and allow ideas to stand or fall on their own merits!
ANECDOTE 4
The Human Flourishing Value Chain
PRESERVE
It is essential that we preserve the farming and ranching way or life and way of making a living. The reasons why are addressed in Anecdote 3
PERSEVERE
It takes tremendous strength to persevere through droughts, floods, fires, fluctuating markets, famines, wars and political policies
PRODUCE
Adaptability + Functional Efficiency + Fertility + Longevity = Profitability
PROFIT
Productive livestock create profitable businesses and profitable businesses create prosperous communities.
PROSPER
Prosperous communities decentralize wealth, power and influence and increase happiness and human flourishing
ANECDOTE 8
The United States of America is an exceptional nation. It is the motherlode of genetics, technology, science and innovation for a large part of the world.
As an exceptional nation it is home to the very best and the very worst of just about every discipline.
Culture, food, music, fashion, ideas, policies, education, cattle… you name it! After traveling to over 120 countries worldwide, I mean this earnestly, not just in jest.
American exceptionalism is exceptionally good and exceptionally bad.
As producers, it’s our job to make sure we’re always plugged into the exceptionally good pockets of excellence that the USA offers. The antithesis is destructive.
The rest of the world has the advantage of cherry picking from the top 5% of our industry and they benefit from it. And even in countries like Argentina, Paraguay or Uruguay, where the average commercial herd is superior to the average American commercial herd, those producers still come to the US to select genetics from those exceptionally good programs.
This polarizing phenomenon can be best dealt with by having a good dose of hubris and humility at the same time. Kris Kristofferson could have been talking about the American cattle industry when he penned “he’s a walking contradiction, partly truth and partly fiction, taking every wrong direction on his lonely road back home.”