Page 1 of 5
Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:08 pm
by Mark Bowles
Well, i have waited a while, as it seems every topic under the sun concerning dexters has been discussed on this site over the years. Beef has been a big issue, websites, council matters .. etc.
But what of the DCS Elite bull Scheme.
Precious few people seem to be at all concerned about the quality of the Dexter bulls.Pick up a bull for £250, wow what a bargain the buyers say, we only need a cheap bull, not anything special.
I have and will continue to support the Elite bull scheme, the bulls we use are all at least stage 1 approved, we have only ever kept 3 entire bulls of our own prefix( in 10 years), all passed stage 1.
When i was on council in 2002, 2003 the scheme was still in its early stages, it was decided to have a voulantary bull scheme for people to join instead of compulsory bull inspections across the board.
The scheme has never taken off, council cant even put a list of approved bulls in the herd book anymore.
What is the point, the most important issue in dexter breeding and it seems to be so low on peoples agenda.
If the breed is to be taken more seriously then the Elite scheme needs to be MADE to work, or bring in bull inspections.
The overall quality of the breed needs to be improved, bull prices need to be higher, as in other breeds where bulls are taken more seriously.
Am i alone in my quest to want the bulls in the national herd to improve.
More comments please
Mark
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:52 am
by Broomcroft
Mark
We're one million% with you. The bull is half your herd, in fact he's more than that when you multiply the effect generation after generation. We put as much effort into selecting our bulls as we do into the whole of the rest of the herd put together. We will now look at using the scheme because I can see that it improves the selection further and also will provide a documentary trail / evidence of a bull's suitability.
Fiona - Would it be possible to put the scheme on the DCS web site?
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:08 am
by Sylvia
Your comments are fully justified, Mark. I think it is generally accepted that the male is 'half the herd' in breeding terms. So what has gone wrong? I wonder if it is yet another case of failure to communicate the information in a form which is user-friendly.
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:47 am
by Martin
Hi Mark,
I totally agree with your comments (as you know I have raised the issue of prices before). I will not be keeping any of my males entire as I would prefer to buy or hire a quality bull when required. I do not mind paying a 'premium' for the correct animal. Twenty years ago I paid £600 for a ram for my commercial flock of sheep, and felt justified when returns on my lambs was always near the top of the prices achieved at market. A bad or indifferent sire is a false economy as most good breeders know.
Maybe this is once again a problem with such a diverse membership, in that those that keep a few cows do not realise the implications of the attitude of 'getting them in calf as cheeply as possible', although that does not seem fair to say when some take care and time to select the best available sire for their 'one or two girls'.
I think most responsible Dexter keepers will agree with your comments Mark and would get behind a movement to improve the number of quality bulls available even if it means them paying extra, I for one would.
Martin
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:16 am
by Broomcroft
Yes, that's the other main issue. Price!
What I have found as a surprise, is that Dexter bulls are so cheap. People actually expect to pay just a few hundred quid for them. It cannot work whilst this attitude exists. Some how, some way, we have to get a decent price for decent bulls, prices that reflect the work and effort that goes into them and that reflect the effect it has on your whole herd, and everybody else's thereafter because your stock gets everywhere eventually. A bull should be really, really special and an investment that can be sold on without losing much money.
I think bulls should be in the thousands and only then will the real effort go into them. But how do you create this market/expectation? The Scheme has got to be number 1, and maybe bull sales like other breeds do?
If you can make quality bulls pay, you'll get quality bulls.
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:35 am
by Woodmagic
Maybe others feel as I do. I was responsible originally, in putting up the idea of an Elite Bull scheme. Sadly I do not feel the current conditions achieve what it ostensibly sets out to do It should encourage the breeding of bulls whose offspring are above average. This can be done to a certain extent by progeny testing, a five-year stretch and demanding big numbers to give any accuracy. Many of those involved over the years in the commercial breeds can tell tales of false results through careful manipulation. The future undoubtedly lies in DNA testing, but this is still in its infancy.
The present Dexter criteria rely quite largely on the appearance of the bull, and that has little to do with what he can throw. The suggested scheme that I originally put forward, used the breeding history of the close relatives, which could give a guide as to the total of the genetic material the bull had to work with, recessives and all.
The present scheme progresses little further than the original formula - that of picking bulls on show results.
Once genetics had begun to percolate, the Government dropped their own scheme, which had also relied on inspection of bulls.
One has only to look at the long regime of including the ‘grand progeny’ to appreciate that those organising the scheme have no knowledge of genetics, an absolute essential if it should be worthy of the name ‘Elite’.
I would jump at the idea of including my bulls, if a useful scheme came over the horizon, based on genetics.
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:46 am
by Inger
The only thing that worries me about the Elite bull scheme is if too many people use the same Elite sires and we end up with a greatly narrowed gene pool. For example, look at how narrow the Friesian gene pool is. They say there are only 12 different female lines of Friesians in the whole World. When you condsider how many Friesians there are, this is a bad situation and its come about because most dairy farmers only used the best bull semen available. My Dad did the same. They meant well, but look at where it has landed them. Fertility is going to become a problem across the whole breed.
Do we want such a state of affairs to occur in an already rare breed with few purebred lines anyway. Wouldn't it be better to use lots of fairly good bulls and a few excellant bulls across the population? That way we keep the range of genes, but people have access to the top bulls through A.I if they want them.
I feel that any bulls being put up for A.I collection should be vetted thoroughly first. We in NZ ended up spreading a new version of Chondrodysplasia throughout NZ because a bull with the gene was collected and most herds used his straws. The damage was only realised in the second and third generation, when offspring was mated to offspring and bulldog calves started turning up.
I feel that bulls being used for A.I should be genetically tested to ensure that bad genes aren't spread to a huge number of herds. Using homegrown bulls on a few cows doesn't affect the national herd like A.I bulls will. So the bulls being collected need to be carefully screened. I also feel that carriers should not be put up for A.I. Its not safe if people don't know what they're doing. There may be a presumption that, because they are available for A.I, they will be safe to use on both carriers and non-carriers, which is not always true at the moment.
By the way, the average price for a bull here in NZ is $1500. I wouldn't pay any more than that. We can get a good bull for that price, so why pay more? If we make bulls too expensive, people will give up trying to buy a good bull and make do with their bulls or use A.I.
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:50 pm
by Broomcroft
Inger
How does the $1500 NZ average for a bull compare to the average for a cow in NZ?
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:08 pm
by Jo Kemp
Absolutely agree the bull is extremely important and a cheap bull is not likely to improve the herd at all! I sold a young proven bull last year and settled for less than I would have got for the meat! however, I feel it was a reasonable price for both buyer and vendor. The buyer told me he knew someone who had paid only £250! I asked what area was it from (restrictions obviously add to the expense of movment) the distance travelled (over 8 hours!) and finally asked about quality .... neither the buyer nor the new owner of the bull knew its history!
Perhaps all bulls offering semen should have passed at least stage 1?
Here, a ministry vet examines the bull before he goes to the AI centre. If he is substandard in any way, they refuse to pass him and semen can only be taken 'on farm' therefore for home use only. (I don't think 'home' means UK but may be wrong) I was actually very impressed with the inspection my bull had - very thorough.
I like woodmagic's idea on extending the criteria for the Elite scheme.... would like to know more.
This subject has tickled my memory - should have put my fellow up for stage 2 months ago!
Jo
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:49 pm
by Martin
Inger,
I don't think the idea will be to outlaw other bulls, I believe we must encourage BETTER bulls not necessarily fewer. There is a breeder in our local group that uses AI some years and a bull that is born of AI on cows other than mum the following year and in the freezer before 30 months. Its a system that works for her and I don't think anyone would say it should not happen, for her it is a good way of improving cows within the herd without the continued expence of AI.
There will always be a market for animals of lower genetic merit and I think that will remain so. Marks point I believe is the fact that we do not encourage progress in breeding better bulls, when we should be rewarding the breeder for giving us an elite animal.
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:30 pm
by Woodmagic
You have a point Inger. Most breeds have suffered by the over use of a popular bull, usually through A.I.
There are few animals that do not carry some unwanted lethal recessives, and few poor bulls that wont carry some good ones. It follows that the use of either will accidentally produce some good animals. The best bulls will continuously sire a high level of quality progeny; the rest will produce some outstanding ones and a proportion of mediocre.
I believe the Dexter has benefited by the small owner, who has kept his own home grown bull, and I believe this should be encouraged. Some will undoubtedly be carrying a gene that is scarce but valuable, maybe in the recessive form. Inspection could wipe these out, without in any way improving the breed overall. Allowing such bulls to be used by the small breeder will ensure the rare gene remaining in the breed, and the unwanted genes may well be dropped in later generations. If the small numbers of his stock turn out to be inferior they won’t last long. It is inferior stock sold by the recognised breeder that is really dangerous, because the novice assumes they must be good.
When someone asks my advice about choosing a bull, I always suggest they take a look at his unselected progeny. It must be the lot, not simply a view of the best. I have always argued that I don’t need to look at the bull itself. A good advert for a bull should not be a picture of him, but his daughters.
Anyone with a copy of ‘My Love Affair’ will find my ideas in the appendices, and they were also reprinted in a recent copy of the Bulletin, they were intended as a basis for an informed approach.
In the case of A.I. bulls, in theory it would be useful to test for unwanted recessives, in practice they only become dangerous when they appear in large numbers. The second achondroplasia gene referred to, was bred in before a test was available, and to my knowledge still has not occurred in Dexters in this country.
It would be an expensive hurdle to test for all known cattle lethals, most of which do not occur in Dexters, but I would favour eliminating A.I. bulls carrying the achondroplasia gene. The other tests I would favour would be examining his offspring and close relatives for signals of undesirable genes, for which there may as yet be no DNA proof. I would bring back checking the bull at six months in order to assess his dam’s rearing and milking ability, not as a beauty contest on the bull’s appearance, which provides no information on his breeding abilities.
Old-fashioned prejudice demands that I should enjoy looking at my bulls, but I accept their appearance has little to do with their breeding ability.
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 11:01 pm
by Duncan MacIntyre
The bull scheme is perhaps a bit disappointing, and I have to admit to not using it when I could and should have. Part of the problem is likely the cost/benefit of having a bull on scheme - there really is little price differential to be seen. I think perhaps we should make all bull registrations subject to inspection, and a small proportion of the very best given elite status, rather than depending on breeders to joint the scheme voluntarily. This of course would raise the usual storm of protest from those who want a cheap way of getting cows in calf. Sadly raising standards is going to have a cost no matter how we do it. Another option might be, and I suggest this without ever having discussed the practicalities of it with anyone, limit the number of calves which can be registered by a non-classified bull. Then larger herds or bull hirers would have to have bulls which were siring a larger number of calves inspected. They are likely to be the herds in a better position to afford such things, and the field is left open to small breeders to either use a cheap and cheerful bull or to pay extra for one of proven higher quality. In the past even the bulls the Society put on AI were not subject to enough scrutiny beforehand. We certainly should not be afraid of price differential between top and bottom ends of the market for both males and females, and push the advantages of DCS approved sales with inspected stock.
Duncan
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:34 am
by Inger
Broomcroft, the average purebred cow in NZ is around $1000.
No Martin, I didn't think that non elite bulls would be banned. Its just that human nature being what it is (and I'm included in that mindset), people want to use the best bulls to improve their herds. So inevitably the best bulls become over-represented in all the offspring being registered over the following 10 years or so. Then in the following generations, the sons from those few elite bulls, in turn go into A.I and people will of course use them, because they are the best.
So the situation gradually arises where most of the younger generations of registered Dexters come from the same half dozen original sires.
The Dexter Society is then faced with the same predicament it had a number of years ago, when the numbers of purebred Dexters dropped to a very small number, leaving only a few different bloodlines to choose from.
If we don't pay attention to genetic diversity, we risk backing ourselves into a genetic corner that could have been avoided by careful planning.
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:46 am
by Broomcroft
The average price of a bull in NZ relates to the cow price in a similar way to the UK then, but the cost of producing a quality bull is about 5 times that of a cow! What that means is, it's a waste of time producing a quality bull for sale. That is unless you go the whole hog, go Elite and provide straws. Then presumably it pays? Not what I've heard. But then you end up with is just a few Elite bulls being used everywhere! Maybe the Elite Scheme shouldn't be so Elite? Widen it, simplify it a bit to get diversity...just a thought. For example, every time I go on a forum there he is, Redberry Prince and a few others.
Sorry to repeat myself, but better prices that reflect the high cost of producing a quality bull simply must be achieved, or you won't get many good bulls. I would argue that a market to generate interest and get people in touch with what it is they are buying and why, would help. It could be a real, physical market (travelling a problem), or an online market with quality photos, full history, progeny and all the details necessary to get the point across and generate interest.
Not sure I'm making myself clear but I know what I mean!
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:57 am
by Woodmagic
Since I have no conviction that inspection of a bull can give any enlightenment on the value of my bull’s breeding abilities, I would certainly not be happy with any Society inspection, unless it was simply to look at the bull’s progeny and relatives, which I would go along with. Otherwise it would be the signal for me to give up on the Society altogether, Duncan.
My aim when breeding a bull is to provide myself with an animal that will improve my own herd, not to make money out of selling him. He will cost a little more than a cow to rear because of the necessary isolation, but certainly not five times. I have reared and sold very few bulls over the years, believing that their genetic background must be of a much higher standard than the female to warrant breeding from them. Far from widening the Elite, I would like to see a stringent set of demands so that the term ‘Elite’ really meant something.
Mostly, the young bulls I have sold, have been at weaning, and at that stage have cost the same as the heifer calf to rear. I admit they are usually not handled, but I assume the new owner is prepared to take this on. I have never aimed for a high price, but I don’t want to sell an inferior animal, because I value the Woodmagic name.
The number of bulls registered in future, is going to be inhibited by the latest financial hurdles of registration, some members will probably decide to continue outside the Society.
The price of bulls must be governed largely by what they can produce, and if the prices of females at the last Rare Breed sale in this area are anything to go by, the prospects are not good.