|
Post by brightraven on Feb 5, 2020 12:59:36 GMT -6
I don't care for employees that require babysitting either. Very few make their sole income from cattle. Most sell hay ,clear land, do construction etc. And a large number calve year round. I pay my cows just like I pay my men. But I expect them to do what they get paid for. I also expect my cows to do what they are paid to do, but they are my livestock and therefore their welfare is my responsibility. If they become problematic they are culled out of the herd and they move on. They will not suffer if I can do anything to prevent it. That is our job as livestock owners. To do otherwise is unethical. Silver, you and Andy are both paying your cows? When you pay people to just lay around, chew their food, and fornicate - they call it welfare.
|
|
|
Post by fence on Feb 5, 2020 13:01:57 GMT -6
I don't care for employees that require babysitting either. Very few make their sole income from cattle. Most sell hay ,clear land, do construction etc. And a large number calve year round. I pay my cows just like I pay my men. But I expect them to do what they get paid for. I also expect my cows to do what they are paid to do, but they are my livestock and therefore their welfare is my responsibility. If they become problematic they are culled out of the herd and they move on. They will not suffer if I can do anything to prevent it. That is our job as livestock owners. To do otherwise is unethical. I agree, I don't recall saying anything about letting them suffer
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2020 13:04:41 GMT -6
I also expect my cows to do what they are paid to do, but they are my livestock and therefore their welfare is my responsibility. If they become problematic they are culled out of the herd and they move on. They will not suffer if I can do anything to prevent it. That is our job as livestock owners. To do otherwise is unethical. Silver, you and Andy are both paying your cows? When you pay people to just lay around, chew their food, and fornicate - they call it welfare. They work for room and board. Which is out of pocket expense for me In exchange they convert forage into beef.
|
|
|
Post by brightraven on Feb 5, 2020 13:07:14 GMT -6
Silver, you and Andy are both paying your cows? When you pay people to just lay around, chew their food, and fornicate - they call it welfare. They work for room and board. Which is out of pocket expense for me In exchange they convert forage into beef. Socialist. 😉
|
|
|
Post by fence on Feb 5, 2020 13:09:28 GMT -6
Silver, you and Andy are both paying your cows? When you pay people to just lay around, chew their food, and fornicate - they call it welfare. They work for room and board. Which is out of pocket expense for me In exchange they convert forage into beef. My cows live the good life. It it gets below 10 f. I bring em all in the house to sit by the fire. Swear to God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2020 13:11:02 GMT -6
They work for room and board. Which is out of pocket expense for me In exchange they convert forage into beef. Socialist. 😉 What can I say. I'm Canadian. All you Yankies know we are red hot commies up here. Besides, I tried to pay them cash but they shit all over it.
|
|
|
Post by tcranch on Feb 5, 2020 17:24:31 GMT -6
Yes! And it appears to me that trait carries on in lineage, even with first calf heifers. We don’t get birth weights anymore since gone commercial, just use visual appraisal of n terms of small or large. When I had registered cattle we weighed all of the calves at birth. We had one particular cow that was one the largest at around 1550 that alway had the smallest calf even smaller than most heifers calves. We typically had high birth weights from those Charolais it was very common for 100-120# and a couple 135#. The aforementioned cow never had a calf over 88# and her lady calf at 12 years old was 60# out of a consistently high BW bull. We used to weigh our calves even though we're commercial and just used a bathroom scale. After Hubby had shoulder surgery I tried it once and was traumatized when the scale shot dangerously close to a deuce. One 'n done, I'm out! Plus I had no business trying to hold a squirming calf for no real reason. Bought a birth weight tape and only use it occasionally, like when a heifer spits out a whopper, and it's accuracy is +/- 7 lbs.
|
|
|
Post by brightraven on Feb 5, 2020 17:31:20 GMT -6
We don’t get birth weights anymore since gone commercial, just use visual appraisal of n terms of small or large. When I had registered cattle we weighed all of the calves at birth. We had one particular cow that was one the largest at around 1550 that alway had the smallest calf even smaller than most heifers calves. We typically had high birth weights from those Charolais it was very common for 100-120# and a couple 135#. The aforementioned cow never had a calf over 88# and her lady calf at 12 years old was 60# out of a consistently high BW bull. We used to weigh our calves even though we're commercial and just used a bathroom scale. After Hubby had shoulder surgery I tried it once and was traumatized when the scale shot dangerously close to a deuce. One 'n done, I'm out! Plus I had no business trying to hold a squirming calf for no real reason. Bought a birth weight tape and only use it occasionally, like when a heifer spits out a whopper, and it's accuracy is +/- 7 lbs. I use a bathroom scale. I have tested it for accurate. It is right on. I have a weight tape. I have compared it to the bathroom scale and found it too inconsistent for registry weights. I will say - when they are in that 100 pound range, it is all I want. I weigh them almost when they hit the ground. At they point, they are not wiggling.
|
|
|
Post by tcranch on Feb 5, 2020 17:55:10 GMT -6
Calving theoretically starts March 7th (according to the gestation calculator), which means any time two weeks prior is game on. Very anxious to see what my calves look like this year with 2 new bulls and EPD's all over the board, CED +16, +11 and +7. And I used the +11 (a yearling) on my heifers due to an unfortunate lightning strike on my intended bull.
But going back to it depends on the cow, used the CED +16 as one of the bulls on my mature cows last year and the ones he tagged that grow 'em big had smaller than usual but still nice calves, I would guess 80+ lbs. In a perfect world, my heifers would all have 65 lb calves - but my world is less than perfect.
|
|
|
Post by okie on Feb 5, 2020 20:30:46 GMT -6
Some of you are forgetting about heterosis. It's easy to assume that the cow has more influence on birthweight with commercial crossbreds. The more maternal heterosis involved the bigger the calf! Sure the old flop eared RWF with a diluter gene has big calves even with a CE angus bull that produces light calves on all the black cows... maximum heterosis. I've always been amazed at how many customers will have, for example, a char/hereford heifer and they want to breed her to an angus bull because all angus are calving ease in their mind and then they blame the bull when they pull the calf. It's a much better option to go back with a calving ease hereford or char in that case unless the angus bull is so extreme that it negates the heterosis.
|
|
|
Post by tcranch on Feb 7, 2020 17:37:11 GMT -6
Woohoo, baby's got back! Had my retained heifers pelvic measured/BANGS today and the average score was 181.05, Boeing (because she's #727) topped the list at 232/16x14.5. They should theoretically be able to have a 78-90 lb calf unassisted - and keep in mind, they're measured at 11 months instead of the "standard" 12 so a little extra wiggle room. That said, I don't want them to have that large a calf the first time but again, back to lineage, CE bull and a flip of the coin. The only snafu this time was when I was giving them their magnets, let one out of the chute before I realized the magnet was stuck to the metal balling gun. Thought she swallowed it a little too easy - my bad.
|
|
|
Post by tcranch on Feb 8, 2020 18:42:16 GMT -6
Saw this on another forum and not sure of the validity (hint - grammar is your friend) but does essentially support the general consensus on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Jake on Feb 18, 2020 8:23:40 GMT -6
People put too much emphasis on BW in my opinion. I'm in agreeance with Ebeneezer, shape has more to do with calving ease than weight does. And when it comes to mature cows there is no reason to breed them to a heifer bull that's going to throw 55-65# calves.
|
|
|
Post by 76bar on Feb 18, 2020 11:46:50 GMT -6
Excellent points on the BWT & Calving Ease Summary you posted TCR. The only thing I'd add would be stacking low Bwt genetics sooner rather than later results in females including 1st CH's incapable of even a minor Bwt challenge. As has been mentioned, calf shape is far more important than Bwt alone. FWIW and rarely discussed, is the female's tolerance for the discomfort associated with calving. Over the years I've assisted an occasional heifer who appeared to be in distress and when the calf fell out with nary a tug was disgusted to realize she was a wimpy faker. Bye Bye.
|
|
|
Post by 11111 on Feb 18, 2020 11:50:00 GMT -6
Too low birthweight, we find ourselves struggling with more sickness. Some heifer safe bulls still have great vigor but we do see the smaller calves having more difficulty thriving with the others of moderate bw.
That being said, I prefer the 87-90lbs range on everything, except first calf heifers, in which I’d rather be 75-80.
I believe that CEM needs to be paid attention to more. If you plan on retaining. Our most “dramatic” mothers this year were SAV Sensation daughters. They literally had no desire to calve and were lazy. Look at that CEM. Made me a big believer. I was literally like “oh, another Sensation heifer, be ready to pull that 62lbs calf...” it was ridiculous.
We can’t sell a bull that is over 95lbs BW around here. They get their balls taken right away.
|
|