Ebenezer

Me too. Good to have you Ebenezer.

Sorry, I missed it. A big influence for me was Larry Leonhardt. He was a wonderful teacher to me in that he never gave me the answer but made me think it out. He would mention Bonsma type from time to time and it never really dawned on me that he knew so much by the look or the type he desired. Then the more I read on Bonsma the more I realized that Bonsma was a mind and a half or two minds in his ability to link phenotype to function. I personally think he was a genius and Larry was as well. I have never nor will I ever try to imitate either one of them. For one, I cannot, and secondly, I am limited in some ways of area, forage, time and such. But what I learned from Larry was set a type and go for it. Larry did not let inbreeding hinder his quest. Neither did he let a targeted type hinder his experimentation. On the other hand, Bonsma did not want strong linebreeding and was more of an annual inspection and keep or cull type program from the best I have read.

From both men, the need for the female to function was key. I see such a lop sided effort in today's beef industry with carcass based selection of all cattle. That is not the case in broilers, hogs, sheep, goats or any other species that I know of. Dairy is a totally different animal with a focus on milk but now concern for more than just type and milk. Maybe I'm dreaming but I think that the focus on beef females can still provide excellent meat in steer mates and even better growth when a commercial producer takes genetics for the best functioning females, blends it into his mama cows and sells feeders from terminal (Larry preferred the word "paternal") type bulls. My heart is with commercial production even though I breed registered animals.

I will never achieve what either of these men did. I will do good to sort out some genes in cows and sheep and see minor steps of improvement. But I greatly enjoy the challenges, the fit to fescue or "get gone", the selection for females that will wear out at 14+ YO doing what I need, ... Larry ended with a focus on tight bred highly functional female-focused cattle. If I am slighting him, someone please correct me but that is my take on it. Bonsma wanted continual improvement in the herd/breed but seemed to think that the breed could be what I call a do-all and more of the American type yet with more balance because he focused as heavily on female form and function as he did on growth, weights and such.

I guess I am a bit more like Bonsma in that respect. The cull bull I pictured was as terminal in type and growth as I really need in this environment and management. He sired calves that were 650+ weaned on endophyte fescue, no supplements. I have mentioned in past posts on the topic of linebreeding that there is about a 15% chance of succeeding with any individual line building effort because so many good cattle do well on line crosses but cannot stand the inbreeding pressure. Because of that I will continue with that same line, for example, from the 26 cow, the dam of that bull. She may be at the top end of what I need or want in performance but as a female I cannot beat her nor throw much mud. She stifled 5 years ago and has not missed a lick. She is 14+/- and bred back. I do keep her separated from most of the herd but she ran with the heifers over the winter and breed to a bull and will calve right on. That line may fail but we'll see before we turn out the lights or outcross it to keep it around. There are other projects like that here, too. Never put all of your eggs in one basket when the odds are 15/85! Sorry to go long but that's what came to mind.

Good post. The kind that makes you think about the decisions you make.

You won't hijack the thread by asking questions. I will take a stab at your question. As long as you are still pushing the female to perform at peak levels for the enviroment she is in the steers will work just fine. As long as what you are raising is capable of hitting the choice grade with a acceptable yield grades your doing good.

I think with the adapted female question you play off of the original genetics or the genetics you are willing to buy in. So if you started with a "boxy type cow" cow herd you will not move as far from that type cow (and related males) as if you press all of the buttons on Bonsma selection. I probably repeat myself over and over but Bonsma's model cow was a great dairy cow. The rib pattern (angle), the slope of the bottom line, the neck extension, ... was all towards dairy type in his beef breed selection. He did not want to inbred and used outcrossed bulls. This was also with annual inspection/selection of individual breeding stock and evaluation of performance. He recommended local bull tests to increase growth type performance. So I see what he did as balancing efforts but he was probably smart enough to see them on a higher plain of thought than I think.

When you tweak the Bonsma selection, as Larry Leonhardt did in the last years with closed herd breeding, the extremes are more unique in the long run from my limited knowledge and merely from pictures, blogs and emails. Those latter Shoshone bulls (some but not all) that sired or resulted from cows like Larry desired could be less typical in desired looks and they had a maturity pattern (not sexual development) that was years long. A bull that many of us would pass over at 1 or 2 years old would be a bull to die for at 5 YO. But the steers from his operation and from purchasers of his breeding did very well on finish and grade. I do not have that data but work from memory. But again, those cattle could be outcrossed by others and Larry's focus was on the female and making a line that would be great female influencers to aid commercial cattlemen in a 2 type system: great brood cows bred to terminal type bulls to sell the entire calf crop as terminals and make the most from the ranch or farm. Bonsma's goal was a herd of cattle that had all functions but with great cows as a base.

Where I struggle with all of the above is that Emulous based cattle did well in our region, including the cows. If you remember that cow type from the era of Emulous Bob of K Pride and maybe even into Ankonian Dynamo, they were the "square type" but functioned well. I will not go off on too much but when I have trialed or bred cattle "most like Bonsma" or "similar to latter Shoshone" our environment did not treat them well. I love looking at pictures from the west of Shoshone linked cattle. But I do not think that I can make that type fully function here. My guess is that environment sets the type.

On CT there was the question last week or so about MM EPD. I asked a basic question and got no traction. What is your cutoff point for annual breed-back for your cattle herd? I think the milk level is a key part to that issue. Do you use 90% breed-back and somewhat know that you made the most by feeding just enough or stocking high enough for that % to breed? Or do you feed heavier for more economic input to try to get 100% bred? The discussion stayed on EPDs and faults of that system. I say this as a tie-in and not a rabbit chase; If I purely used Bonsma selection with some inbreeding I think I would need out-cross on some interval to decrease milk and to maintain a targeted breed-back of 90% or whatever the economic threshold is on that for you or me. That might not make sense but, in my opinion, that is what he did in his selection of bulls with performance or balance or whatever you call what he did.

I guess I laugh at myself as much as others would laugh at the meager efforts. But I do not plan on breeding Mr XYZ USA, seeking the latest greatest, buttering up Mr. Deep Pockets or anything famous. I like functional cows, I know the limitations of the environment and (lack of) management here from experience. Why, the best thing we ever did sustainable to boost weaning weights that we could afford was to install water troughs all across the farm. Weaning weights jumped up an average of 25 pounds that year. We did try crossbreeding a while using terminal type bulls and growth type breeds and got a lot more weaning weight only to drop breed-back to dismal levels. There were better results with better selections of sires and breeds but not with as much increase in weaning weights. Other efforts produce both ups and downs but working on soil health and selection within the home genetics has eased acceptable weights up but economically attainable weaning weights will never be the bragging point. Cow fertility, cow longevity, proper function of cattle without many obvious flaws, some fun at inbreeding, some crashes from inbreeding, some efforts of out crossing or the hope for the formation of new lines are more interesting and important to me than blowing smoke or trying to compete with somebody a state or two away. I think EPDs will perpetually be a carrot on a stick and only inches away from anyone's and everyone's grasp. Where I am pleased are the results that others get from the use of cattle from here. The folks who use bulls on their commercial herds are my friends and neighbors and if they do good or better then I have been a part of a functional community.

Hmmm I may need to rethink things. Our heaviest calves consistently come out of a place that has a wide canyon running through it. I assumed it was because the grass in the bottom was more or less sub irrigated and better. Might have more to do with the running creek and water access than I realized.  Though I'm sure the other still has a big impact.