We have a nice heifer which we are hoping to show during 2006.
She has reared one calf which was weaned some time ago and is due to calve again in March .
Shortly before delivering her calf we noticed that she had a small fifth teat, approximately 1.5 cm long. This teat does not appear to have a milk supply. We understand that the extra teat will cause the heifer to be marked down in the show ring and have refeered her to two vets to discuss the possibility of surgical removal.. One vet says that it is too late as she has produced milk while the second says that the best thing to do is to apply a rubber ring (for de-tailing lambs etc.) to the teat when she is dry.
Has anyone had any experience of this problem?
On a personal note, the teat causes no practical problem and I am reluctant to cause the heifer unnecessary distress. It also seems strange that a surgical "improvement" of this nature should even be allowed in the show ring although I suppose that the main problem would be in identifying that surgery had in fact taken place if it was done on a young calf as is the normal practice.
I would appreciate all comments and advice.
Happy Christmas and a happy new year.
Justmalc.
Extra Teat - Showing Query
-
Duncan MacIntyre
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 12:38 am
- Location: Isle of Bute, Scotland, UK
I would not be in favour of the rubber ring method for several reasons - in an adult animal it is an op that should be done by a vet, using apropriate anaesthetic, and the use of a ring to me is not compatable with use of local anaesthetic at the time of application - pain would go on much longer. I always inject local at base of the teat and use scissors to cut it off level with the surrounding skin. Tie rings or ligatures round is very liable to leave a small stump, easily seen by the judge.
Which brings us to the point you make about removing them in the first place. The main reason for removing them of course is not to fool judges or inspectors. It is because even those which do not appear at first site to produce any milk can be subject to mastitis, some are linked to the main teat and cause a nuisance at milking, some confuse calves which spend too long on the false teat and don't manage to get to the real thing soon enough to get good colostrum absorbtion.
If we were being ultra selective I suppose we should not breed from heifers with supernummerary teats, but usually we can find plenty other reasons for selection or de-selection! They are inherited, and this is the reason that bulls inspected for the elite bull scheme must have four rudimentary teats and not any other number, greater or lesser.
Even bulls can occasionally develop mastitis, especially summer mastitis - I have only seen one or two, one of them was Ilsington Bramble. I only noticed it because he stood in the stall next the cow I was milking, and whilst milking away at the cow I noticed the swelling and discharge from the teat.
I suppose supernummerary teats are more an issue in dairy cattle, but the Dexter should be a dual purpose animal so it would seem wise to discourage them - you may not wish to milk your dexters, but who knows what the owners of future generations will be doing.
Duncan
Which brings us to the point you make about removing them in the first place. The main reason for removing them of course is not to fool judges or inspectors. It is because even those which do not appear at first site to produce any milk can be subject to mastitis, some are linked to the main teat and cause a nuisance at milking, some confuse calves which spend too long on the false teat and don't manage to get to the real thing soon enough to get good colostrum absorbtion.
If we were being ultra selective I suppose we should not breed from heifers with supernummerary teats, but usually we can find plenty other reasons for selection or de-selection! They are inherited, and this is the reason that bulls inspected for the elite bull scheme must have four rudimentary teats and not any other number, greater or lesser.
Even bulls can occasionally develop mastitis, especially summer mastitis - I have only seen one or two, one of them was Ilsington Bramble. I only noticed it because he stood in the stall next the cow I was milking, and whilst milking away at the cow I noticed the swelling and discharge from the teat.
I suppose supernummerary teats are more an issue in dairy cattle, but the Dexter should be a dual purpose animal so it would seem wise to discourage them - you may not wish to milk your dexters, but who knows what the owners of future generations will be doing.
Duncan
Duncan MacIntyre
Burnside Dexters 00316
Burnside
Ascog
Isle of Bute
Burnside Dexters 00316
Burnside
Ascog
Isle of Bute
Extra teats are one of my pet hates, and I do not understand why this is not marked on birth registartion cards.
Ref showing,in my experience, you will definetly get marked down for an extra teat, and I don't think any bull should be registered if he has more than 4 teats, but I wonder how many people new to the world of cattle check their calves when they are born for extra teats, if you find them on your heifer calves its very easy to get them sorted in the first few days.
Regarding the rubber ring suggestion, many years ago I borught a 6 month old rather wild heifer and when she had tamed down I found two extra teats and my vet put a rubber ring on them both and the heifer never batted an eyelid, and they dropped of very nicely.
I guess different soloutions for different occasions.
Cheers
Ann :p :p
Ref showing,in my experience, you will definetly get marked down for an extra teat, and I don't think any bull should be registered if he has more than 4 teats, but I wonder how many people new to the world of cattle check their calves when they are born for extra teats, if you find them on your heifer calves its very easy to get them sorted in the first few days.
Regarding the rubber ring suggestion, many years ago I borught a 6 month old rather wild heifer and when she had tamed down I found two extra teats and my vet put a rubber ring on them both and the heifer never batted an eyelid, and they dropped of very nicely.
I guess different soloutions for different occasions.
Cheers
Ann :p :p
If extra teats are not interfering with the natural operation of the udder I can't see the problem. However I don't think there is any other way of looking at it than dishonest if they are removed for the purposes of selling or showing. This is misleading for the purchaser or judge. Also as an inherited fault it is not doing the breed any good either.
Hi Syilvia
Removal of the teats is in most cases pure cosmetic, but you would have to be very good at taking them off, for it not to be noticed on a newly calved cow or heifer, and as Duncan mentioned they can cause problems in later life, I don't show many of my cows, but I always check for extra teats and take appropriate action, it doesn't bother the calf if its done early enough and as previously mentioned if we had to mark it down of the birth notification cards the society would be able to see it it was a big problem, it alway seems strange to me that an animal which normally only produces one offspring should have 4 teats minimum, but animals who regularly produce more than 2 only have 2 teats, Oh the wonders of nature :p :p :p
Removal of the teats is in most cases pure cosmetic, but you would have to be very good at taking them off, for it not to be noticed on a newly calved cow or heifer, and as Duncan mentioned they can cause problems in later life, I don't show many of my cows, but I always check for extra teats and take appropriate action, it doesn't bother the calf if its done early enough and as previously mentioned if we had to mark it down of the birth notification cards the society would be able to see it it was a big problem, it alway seems strange to me that an animal which normally only produces one offspring should have 4 teats minimum, but animals who regularly produce more than 2 only have 2 teats, Oh the wonders of nature :p :p :p
Hi Duncan,
Many thanks for your reply, I agree that the surgical route is most appealing of the two suggested.
The question underlying my point about showing is that should the heifer in fact be marked down in the show ring for having a fifth teat when, in reality, all the others in the ring may have had an extra teat and have simply had them removed? The fact that she retains the fith teat at present is, while technically a fault, is not a fault which it can be claimed by the judge with any certainty, was not shared by all the stock exhibited at some point in their lives. If the judge cannot say that the competitors were certainly born with four teats then he should not mark our heifer for having five. For all the judge is able to say, our heifer may have the lowest number of teats of any of the exhibits!
How can a judge penalise an extra teat if he cannot be sure that this hereditary fault was not in fact shared by all the other heifers exhibited in their pre-surgical state?
Have a good Christmas.
Malcolm.
Many thanks for your reply, I agree that the surgical route is most appealing of the two suggested.
The question underlying my point about showing is that should the heifer in fact be marked down in the show ring for having a fifth teat when, in reality, all the others in the ring may have had an extra teat and have simply had them removed? The fact that she retains the fith teat at present is, while technically a fault, is not a fault which it can be claimed by the judge with any certainty, was not shared by all the stock exhibited at some point in their lives. If the judge cannot say that the competitors were certainly born with four teats then he should not mark our heifer for having five. For all the judge is able to say, our heifer may have the lowest number of teats of any of the exhibits!
How can a judge penalise an extra teat if he cannot be sure that this hereditary fault was not in fact shared by all the other heifers exhibited in their pre-surgical state?
Have a good Christmas.
Malcolm.
-
Mark Bowles
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1290
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 6:03 pm
- Location: Leicestershire England
-
Peter thornton
- Posts: 326
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:41 pm