Dexter Cattle For Sale Discussion Board

Its a hot potato and there are lots of possible reasons why they are getting bigger...here is one, it should start a discussion... what do you all think?

I believe that one reason the breed has become bigger is because the short leg masks height.

Long needs to be used on short for obvious reasons.

Short breeders only want the short animal, the long calves that are born into a "short" herd are a by product of producing a short herd.

If long animals produced from a short animal weren't registered, (after all they are a by product,) and either went into the food chain or were sold as non pedigree the Pedigree Dexter Herd in the UK would gradually shrink in height.

What do others think?

Stephanie

All my registered bulls have come from short cows and all have fallen within the breed standard height, a couple have been a good couple of inches within. I have had some tall steers but I haven't kept them to run on as bulls for fear of them going over height. That's what the breed standard is for surely.

I think Saffy has seen it well.
In the herds without carriers you see less non-shorts with overheight.
I think the bulldog gene masks the genetic heigths. The shortest short can give you very tall progeny! So I think on these animals the bulldog-gene had a bigger influence than his/her genetic height.

Some countrys like Danmark have forbidden the short-legged animal. By selecting on non-short animals being really non-tall the number of overheigted animals was schrinking fast. They are now on a point the are thinking about using taller animals to prevent to little animals.

Saffy wrote:Its a hot potato and there are lots of possible reasons why they are getting bigger...here is one, it should start a discussion... what do you all think?

I believe that one reason the breed has become bigger is because the short leg masks height.

Long needs to be used on short for obvious reasons.

Short breeders only want the short animal, the long calves that are born into a "short" herd are a by product of producing a short herd.

If long animals produced from a short animal weren't registered, (after all they are a by product,) and either went into the food chain or were sold as non pedigree the Pedigree Dexter Herd in the UK would gradually shrink in height.

What do others think?

Stephanie

Do short breeders only want short animals? It is not always the case that the offspring is huge from s to ns matings but with the policy of overage fees then many will be registered oversize but then registration is only a record of parentage nothing to do with conformation. But is a registered oversize animal a disaster in itself? Repeated n/s matings will bring the offspring size down over time esp. when using a small bull from established n/s to n/s breeding. Could be problematical if mated to a short.

The only certainty here is that we will never please everyone, but perhaps we need to look at the situation in depth and see if changes are needed. Proper studies into statistically significant animals would need to be done over a period of years to allow adult size in relation to birth size to be assessed. This is probably not going to happen.

For my own herd and breeding policy it would be a disaster if non carrier animals were made to be larger - see my post on Nico's thread where I give the heights of my adult cows in 2011. I have spent 15 years making mine smaller but trying to be within the breed standard. The breed standard has been altered allowing bigger at the top of the range, and the lower limit has changed too, though this is a bit fudged by the exact wording. 36" used to be ok although 38" was "preferred". I suspect that the average size of all Dexters is being raised by the increase in the number of people breeding for beef hoping for more return by having slightly larger carcasses - I do not mean that people are deliberately trying to make Dexters big, but there is just a slow creep upwards. We need to remember the weights, widely referred to in literature, 900lbs for a working bull and 800 for a cow.

800lbs is 363kg. How many cows 44" high look healthy at that weight?

The way for an active breed society to counter that would be to emphasise the quality of Dexter beef and help to ensure that we can all sell beef at a premium to help offset the same slaughter charges as a Limousin. But we do not need to wait for others to do this, we can do it ourselves.

After seeing the effect of 4 bulldogs from two cows and one heifer in less than a year I set out to breed non carrier Dexters the size of carrier Dexters. I am still happy with my aim.

Duncan

Duncan MacIntyre wrote: We need to remember the weights, widely referred to in literature, 900lbs for a working bull and 800 for a cow.

800lbs is 363kg.

Duncan

How many of them were shorts? Lots of things were lighter back in the day including people. The Dexter should remain the smallest of our native breeds by comparison. It is equally important that they remain capable of thriving on a grass based diet rather than getting to such a size that intensive feeding is the only solution. I think selling the beef at a premium price is a lost cause due to the 'make up' of the membership.

I think that Stephanie is onto to something here, and that the breed should have a breed standard specifically for shorts, as they are a distinct phenotype.

I think the Dexter should be an animal that can survive and thrive on poorer quality grazing where other breeds would not. It also needs to be of a size that doesn't poach the ground, particularly for me as I am running them on peaty, marshy and clay soils that can't tak heavy pounding. I often look at my own Dexters and think that they're not performing as well as they should/could when I hear of consistently high weights being achieved. Then I think, if other people are producing higher weights and returning a few hundred pounds more than I am, why aren't they expanding and/or bidding up all the cows at sales?

Dexters remain the breed for me because of what they can do, not because they can emulate other breeds in doing something else entirely. I don't want to put myself into the position that dairy farmers are in right now - producing more and more in order to spread costs, only to find that costs are heaping up in an uncertain market.

Rob R wrote: I think that Stephanie is onto to something here, and that the breed should have a breed standard specifically for shorts, as they are a distinct phenotype.

It would be interesting to know how linear scoring has been 'adapted' to deal these two distinct types?

Rob R wrote:.... if other people are producing higher weights and returning a few hundred pounds more than I am, why aren't they expanding and/or bidding up all the cows at sales?

Perhaps because many of them have the capacity to earn more money doing something else with far less effort and so they don't need to do it - it is a lifestyle choice. I think you have also answered your own question i.e. why aren't they bidding up all the cows at sales? ...maybe because in the case of breeding stock they have sufficient stock already to meet the demands of a niche market.

Rob R wrote: I don't want to put myself into the position that dairy farmers are in right now - producing more and more in order to spread costs, only to find that costs are heaping up in an uncertain market.

A couple of questions.

How much has the breed standard upper limit been raised since records began?

Could we be in danger of making the breed standard fit the Dexters we are producing instead of the other way around?

Stephanie

Jac wrote:

Rob R wrote:.... if other people are producing higher weights and returning a few hundred pounds more than I am, why aren't they expanding and/or bidding up all the cows at sales?

Perhaps because many of them have the capacity to earn more money doing something else with far less effort and so they don't need to do it - it is a lifestyle choice. I think you have also answered your own question i.e. why aren't they bidding up all the cows at sales? ...maybe because in the case of breeding stock they have sufficient stock already to meet the demands of a niche market.

Rob R wrote: I don't want to put myself into the position that dairy farmers are in right now - producing more and more in order to spread costs, only to find that costs are heaping up in an uncertain market.

Yes, I was answering my own question, or hinting at it - as you suggest; bigger cows don't make more money, more money makes bigger cows.

Saffy wrote:A couple of questions.

How much has the breed standard upper limit been raised since records began?

Could we be in danger of making the breed standard fit the Dexters we are producing instead of the other way around?

Stephanie

I'm sure there will be someone able to answer that question, but I've been doing some research into my family history and at the 1912 Christmas Fatstock show at York, an 18 month old, presumably very well fed, as was the custom of the time, Dexter bullock, stood 38 inches and weighed ~700lb. If we say that the equivalent would weigh in the region of 420kg today, that makes an increase in size over 100 years of ~30+% in the breed. It's a small sample size, though, but a large increase. By contrast he was purchased alongside a shorthorn at just over 2 years of age that weighed the equivalent of 1403kg. Not sure how that compares to modern shorthorns.

This is the Dexter breed standard as published in herd book 1 - DCS.

A STANDARD DESCRIPTION OF THE
DEXTER.

1. The Dexter is essentially both a milk-producing and a beef
makng breed, and both these points should, in judging, he taken
Into consideration.
2. Colour.--Bulls.-Whole black or whole red (the two
colours being of equal merit). A little white on organs of genera-
tion not to disqualify an animal which answers all other essentials
of this standard description.
Cows.-Whole black or whole red (the two colours being of
equal merit). Black with white on the udder, or red with white
on bag. The extension of the white of the udder slightly along
the inside of flank or under side of the belly, or a little white on
end of tail, shall not be held to disqualify an animal which answers
all other essentials of this standard description. .
3. Head AND Neck.--Head short and broad, with great
'Width between the eyes, and tapering gracefully towards muzzle,
which should be large, with wide distended nostrils. Eyes bright,
prominent, and of a kind and placid expression.
Neck short, deep and thick, and well set into the shoulders,
which,when viewed in front, should be wide, showing thickness
through the heart, the breast coming well forward.
Horns.-These should be short and moderately thick, springing
well from the head, with an inward and slightly upward curve.
4. Body.--Shoulders of medium thickness, full and well filled
in behind, hips wide, quarters thick and deep and well sprung, flat
and wide across loins, well ribbed up, straight underline, udder
well forward, and broad behind with well placed teats of moderate
size, legs short (especially from knee to fetlock), strong, and well
placed under body, which should be as close to the ground as
possible. Tail well set on and level 'with back.
5. Skin.--The skin should be soft and mellow, and handle
well, not too thin, hair fine, plentiful and silky.
6. Dexter Bulls should not exceed 900 Lbs., live weight, when
in breeding condition.
Dexter Cows should not exceed 800 Lbs., live weight, when in
breeding condition.

Rob R wrote:

Jac wrote:

Rob R wrote:.... if other people are producing higher weights and returning a few hundred pounds more than I am, why aren't they expanding and/or bidding up all the cows at sales?

Perhaps because many of them have the capacity to earn more money doing something else with far less effort and so they don't need to do it - it is a lifestyle choice. I think you have also answered your own question i.e. why aren't they bidding up all the cows at sales? ...maybe because in the case of breeding stock they have sufficient stock already to meet the demands of a niche market.

Rob R wrote: I don't want to put myself into the position that dairy farmers are in right now - producing more and more in order to spread costs, only to find that costs are heaping up in an uncertain market.

Yes, I was answering my own question, or hinting at it - as you suggest; bigger cows don't make more money, more money makes bigger cows.

Depends whether you are killing them or keeping them for breeding. Short cows producing larger (ns) offspring do make more money for beef. In the same way a commercial cross does. I think it is this aspect that has kept the breed going. The A team and the B team.

Jac wrote:Depends whether you are killing them or keeping them for breeding. Short cows producing larger (ns) offspring do make more money for beef. In the same way a commercial cross does. I think it is this aspect that has kept the breed going. The A team and the B team.

There is a difference between receiving more money for beef and making more money from beef.

As you said earlier, they are supplying a limited niche market, so producing more beef doesn't get you any more money than is available in the market, it may even make it cheaper as the market consumes more meat for the same money.

How many herds are there that specifically select short cows for ns beef production? In my experience the short breeders tend to be those who are breeding for breeding stock & showing, and those with the more commercial beef herd types are the ones using only non-shorts, and likely breeding from the larger non-shorts.

Jac, in answer to your question on linear and heights.
When we were first in negotiations with Holstein UK (HUK) and on farm assessing the first animals it very quickly became apparent that we had to remove the stature score (height) from the assessment of the animal because of the distorted results it produced.
The stature score still shows on the linear printout as a record of the animals height and its conforming to the breed height standard but is not included within the actual calculation of the final scores.