Page 1 of 1
Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:13 pm
by Peter thornton
I'm just looking through the notes for the AGM and I see that in the last year over 25% of females were not registered. This compares to 18% not registered in the previous year. The actual number was 744. This is shown as equating to a loss of income of £8,928.
There are 2 points worth considering:
The first one is to say that whilst the loss of income is calculated as 744 X £12, this is not the real picture. What about the loss of income from the female calves that these females will produce? Assuming they are not being bred for beef.
The other question is to wonder how many are from unregistered bulls and therefore cannot be registered?
I know that some people think that this is not a problem and I respect that view but can I suggest that the AGM considers the following actions?
1. Allow birth notification of females with subsequent full registration up to, say, 18 months. This would acknowledge the fact that some are now sending females for beef. It would also encourage this practice, especially if the animal was not required to be named before full registration. Yes, we are a little reluctant to kill a named beast!!
2. Relax the requirement for bull registration. By all mneans introduce an inspection system but the DNA requirement is having a significant effect. Registrations are down to less than half of previous years.
I can't get to the AGM but what do other people think?
Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:14 pm
by Broomcroft
Peter
When you say 25% were not registered, 25% of what? Do you mean that these animals were birth notified but not then registered?
According to the BCMS there are thousands of unregistered Dexters.
Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:26 pm
by Peter thornton
This is the gap between the BCMS figure for the year (2883) and our registrations (2139). You will find the figures on page 7 of the AGM agenda.
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:04 am
by wagra dexters
DCAI has registration up to 18 months for heifers and 3 years for bulls. This seems to work well, although some members would prefer it 3 yrs for heifers also, giving her time to produce a calf. What are the ages in England?
Do DCMS figures have any relevance at all to the future of the Dexter as a registered, parent verified stud breeding animal? Don't they just indicate that there is an outlet for commercial quality or crossbred Dexters?
My thoughts ...Upgrading (or in your case, Appendix & Experimental) has been a fact of both our societies. All the more reason for greater need to conserve, by means of registration, both the concentration and the diversity of original Dexter genes for posterity, for whatever known, suspected, or as yet unknown, benefits they may possess.
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:20 am
by Peter thornton
Registration is £12 if registered before 30 days. It then increases to £40 up to 12 months anbd then £100 after that.
The BCMS figures are open to interpretation. The increase in percentage of unregistered births could mean an increasing acceptance of Dexters as a commercial breeding animal or it could mean that we are making it too difficult to register stock.
However, if there is a pool of unregistered females out there then I believe that we should follow your practice in encouraging registration at a later stage. This would encourage members to be more selective in which females were used for beef and which for breeding. It can be argued that the present scheme encourages a blanket registration of females which in turn results in an oversupply of female stock.
If females are to be used to breed purebred Dexters then the society should make every effort to encourage registration of those animals.
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:41 pm
by Broomcroft
Agree with what you're saying but I don't understand the figures Peter. The RADAR cattle book 2006 shows 23,000 Dexters and crosses. See download at: www.DBOinfo/Downloads.html.
For beef producers, I would say it's not a very attractive package at the moment. We register within 30 days to save the very high £40 charge thereafter, and that is the only reason and is not a good one. £12 is OK but we would much prefer to wait MUCH longer to see how the animal turns out. The £40 charge after 30 days is absolutely out of the question and we would never pay that much.
We also registered a bull last year at a cost of £90 (don't now what the extra was) for similar reasons (to avoid more charges if we left it later), and he is now going to the butcher. Just a waste of time, effort and money.
I would call for far greater flexiblity, i.e. time to consider properly before registration, more in line with Margaret's Australian example or thereabouts.
Margaret - We can register late in theory, but in practice we have to register very quickly (a few weeks) because of the high costs thereafter. It also means we can't effectively register in sizeable batches, we have to keep revisiting the process. I do it every 2 weeks so I don't forget!
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:38 pm
by Woodmagic
There seems a consensus of opinion on this one. Like you Peter, I am unable to get to the AGM. I wonder if there is anyone willing to pick up the baton and run with it. With the advent of passports there should be no problem over authenticity. A percentage of registrations are lost simply because newcomers to the breed are not familiar with the rules and apply too late. A breeder may decide he is giving up, the calves are not registered, and the purchaser can do nothing unless they are prepared to pay an exorbitant late fee. Less stringent rules should ultimately result in more registrations.
While bulls for use in other herds should be subject to DNA testing I think it a mistake to insist upon this, when a bull is for personal use only, making the cost of registration so high, tempting his use even where you may feel he has not turned out as you hoped. I still insist no stockman, however experienced can tell by appearance how a bull can breed, so I would be dead against any inspection. Without a lot of money tied up in him, a couple of poor calves would be enough to beef him.
Bulking registrations should mean less work for the office; at present I tend to record them immediately, for fear I forget.
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 12:15 am
by wagra dexters
Beryl, I disagree on DNA exemptions for closed herd bulls. A reasonably sized herd needs 2 bulls every 2 years. It's not impossible for a bull to get in with the other bull's mob, or for a calf to join his dam, etc. It costs no more for an 'either/or' parent verification.
Your late reg fees are about what we used to expect to pay for reg & DNA together, for heifers. The price has come down recently.
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:09 am
by Woodmagic
My argument is not for exemption for bulls in closed herds, there are very few closed Dexter herds. It is simply that where a bull is not sold or used for hire, but mates only probably with two or three cows in a small herd, it should not be required to undertake the DNA test and cost. It is the fact that many such bulls have been reared in the past, which probably accounts for the diversity of the breed, compared with the vast majority of commercial breeds. For instance, inspection for some cosmetic detail could have eliminated the immunity to BSE. Most of the intrinsic values of the Dexter, as compared to other breeds, cannot be assessed by sight. I am considerably more sceptic about man’s ability to select constructively, and I think the history of our present popular breeds proves it.
A.I. is quite expensive and difficult for the amateur relying on someone coming in at the right time, T.B. restrictions make hiring expensive, and many smaller breeders are likely to turn away from remaining pedigree as the only cheap option, compared to the cost of registering as it now stands.
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 9:10 am
by Broomcroft
It seems that 75% of Dexters are not registered according to the BCMS figures. The Dexter population is expanding, but at the same time registrations are falling. Is there a message there? I think so. I can see registrations falling further or stagnating unless changes are made not just to the system but to the whole emphasis of DCS.
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:38 pm
by Woodmagic
The discrepancy between DCS and BCMS is not that great. The 22,000 would include all animals of all ages and both sexes. The birth figures gives an approximation of the number of breeding cows, for which a small addition should be made for animals that don’t calve. The number of breeding cows is the figure which really counts, and here the differential is 744 still an appreciable number, but not thousands. However, if the DCS doesn’t tackle it, I suggest it is likely to escalate. I hope someone attending the AGM is prepared to argue the case, since the subject has already been raised.
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:56 pm
by Peter thornton
Remember that each of these 744 animals can potentially raise around 10 calves of which 50% will also be heifers that cannot be registered.
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:29 pm
by Broomcroft
Sorry, yes, the DCS confirmed approx 18,000 females on their books. I think I'm losing my marbles as it was me who reported it! I just remembered the huge discrepancy we thought there was in another topic.
Maybe the 744 were beefed or are going to be?
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:35 pm
by Woodmagic
Even if they were to be beefed, they should have been birth notified.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 1:13 am
by Inger
In NZ, we are charged $10 for each registration (no birth notification required) until the animal reaches a year old, then if we want to register it, we must pay $20. If the animal is over 2 years old, we have to get approval from the NZ Dexter Society Council to register it.
All bull calves being registered, have to have their DNA certificate sent in with their registration now.
In this way, we can 'recover' unregistered animals, if the new owner decides to join the Dexter Society. The same thing has been done by our Pig Breeder's Association here in NZ, regarding rare breeds of pigs. In the case of the pigs, if the birth of the litter has been registered and the pig tagged before sale, retrospective registeration can be done by the new owner, when they become members of the association. Its very important not to lose these rare breed animals, simply because people haven't gotten around to registering at the appropriate time.