Elite Bull Scheme - Does no one care!

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:24 pm

Sounds like a lot of common sense to me.

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:24 pm

Hi Sylvia - I agree there is no way you can assess the potential of a young bull to become an 'Elite' sire at registration, but equally if the bull is not up to breed standard, there is no way that the bull should be registered.

Robert Kirk
Boram Dexters

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:32 pm

The word "Elite" is a problem because it really means something and it doesn't mean OK, it means very, very special. As mentioned before, there are sort of two conversations going on, one for a basic approval scheme, and the other for an Elite Scheme.

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:36 pm

Hi Clive - The 'Elite' scheme has been running for approx 7 years; to date we have no 'Elite' bulls. In my opinion, Council should be doing more to 'police' our breed standard on all young bulls being registered. Thereby giving prospective purchasers some guarantee that the bulls are at least up to that level.

At the moment, only those bulls being sold at the Annual Show & Sale are inspected and guaranteed up to breed standard. Surely this inspection should be extended to all young bulls being registered.

Robert Kirk
Boram Dexters

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:49 pm

The prime example of the deception of judging a bull on his looks occurred when I first came into Dexters. Many influential breeders at the time believed the long leg was responsible for the bulldog. There was insistence on using only short leg bulls in order to avoid the recessive.
My suggestion that a long leg bull was made available for the smallholder was greeted with horror. Fortunately for me, inspection of bulls had just been dropped, and I was free to go ahead.
For centuries man has bred on the appearance of the sire. Now that the commercial breeds can make a choice on performance, progress has leapt ahead. The day that Council decides they are only going to register my bulls on the basis of inspection, I shall retire from the Society. We are in the 21st century not the 19th. I am happy that anyone can continue to choose their bulls on looks if they wish, but have no intention of allowing anyone dictate to me, that I should take such a retrograde step. Neither do I believe that allowing folk a free hand has resulted in any down grading of the breed, the Cardiff experiment would suggest the exact opposite.

Kirk- Cascade Herd US · Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:50 pm

Woodmagic wrote:I am happy that anyone can continue to choose their bulls on looks if they wish, but have no intention of allowing anyone dictate to me, that I should take such a retrograde step.

Does everyone agree with the following statements? :

1. Selecting a bull for use simply because he is capable of impregnating a cow, without regard to his phenotype, performance, or genotype is a worst-case scenario and degrades the national herds.

2. Selecting a bull for use, simply based on how he looks, is usually better than no selection at all.

3. Selecting a bull for use based on a breeding plan and based on the bull's probable genotype (which in turn is based on many factors including his ancestry, a good knowledge of genetics, and the bull's performance) is the best case scenario.

4. Inexperienced breeders, on average, may not be able to judge and select a bull as well as someone with experience.

5. Experienced breeders with breeding goals and a breeding plan, on average, may be able to make better breeding decisions than an outsider simply looking at the phenotype of a bull.

If all these statements are true, then it would seem that bull selection should be offered as a service to the inexperienced, while those with experience and a breeding plan, are left alone to continue with their plans.

Kirk

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:01 pm

I agree with all the listed points and I find it implausible that appearance is apparently nigh on irrelevant, which appears to be what is being said, unless I'm misunderstanding it. The whole of nature is based upon looks/fitness, in the main, that's why my wife chose me. Animals don't have a genetic database to look up their potential partners in!

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:09 pm

Hello Beryl - I do hope you are keeping well.

When I purchased my first Dexter 17 years ago, I was told that the Breed Standard was the 'bible' of the Society - I have always had this in mind. Not everyone has had the benefit of a lifetime's experience with breeding livestock as you and I.

I believe like others that there are undesirable bulls being used, mainly because breeders do not know how to interpret the breed standard. A bull inspection will give an inexperienced breeder the opportunity to retain the animal if it reaches the standard, or use it for beef later on, and choosing a replacement bull up to breed standard to use on their herd.

If inspections had not ceased these undesirable bulls would not be around, the Herd Book would be better for it.

There is no way I want the breed back in the 19th century. Equally, breeders should not be put off by the word 'inspection' - many societies use this method to improve their herds/flocks.

In my opinion, Council seem to have forgotten breed standard in favour of DNA and parent verifying. Surely, all three are very important aspects when considering the registration of a young bull.

Robert Kirk
Boram Dexters

Kirk- Cascade Herd US · Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:56 pm

Broomcroft wrote:I agree with all the listed points and I find it implausible that appearance is apparently nigh on irrelevant, which appears to be what is being said, unless I'm misunderstanding it. The whole of nature is based upon looks/fitness, in the main, that's why my wife chose me. Animals don't have a genetic database to look up their potential partners in!

I believe genotype is everything and that phenotype provides one window to view some of those genes. Other ways to attempt to evaluate genotype include performance records, ancestor's performance, DNA testing, etc.

You're right that in nature, selection is often based on phenotype especially when no other information is available to give any insights as to genotype. Usually, the animal with the best phenotype is somewhat more likely to have better genes than one with a poorer phenotype, but not always. Nature has a way of sorting this out. Even if the awkward looking animal with excellent genes has fewer offspring (due to not being selected as a mate by as many females), his progeny and descendants may have better survivability than the more numerous offspring of the good looking animal with some poor genetics.

When your wife selected you, in addition to your phenotype, she likely also subconsciously selected you based on your probable genotype as exhibited via your performance, the strength of your family members and their attributes, etc.. She likely didn't select you based simply on your good looks (which I'm sure are amazing).

So, yes, phenotype can be one important tool in evaluating genotype. But, don't forget all the other important tools.

Kirk

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:13 am

I have been reading this thread with interest but reluctant to put my 2 bobs worth in. But have to anyway :D

I am in Australia and looking at using a bull from the UK (need to choose between 4 or 5) via AI. Now - I can't see the bull. I can't see his parents or progeny (OK maybe able to see some of the Australian born progeny). At present it is difficult to find out their pedigrees for more than the few generations on our Australian herdbook (be nice to use your online pedigree, but am reluctant to pay for it!!).

However I definitely do not want to use anything with huge conformational faults and I would like to think that the bull I choose conforms to breed standards - and yes he must be a long leg. So for me the bull scheme at least lets me know that the bull is part way there - at least I thought it did! :;): Having said that all the newer bulls on our AI list need to be accredited so have been observed by a vet and straightness of legs, scrotal size etc have been assessed. However, I have to admit that I am more likely to lean to using a bull that is on your bull scheme than one that isn't, this way I can at least know he is within the breed standard HIMSELF - there are NEVER any guarantees in breeding.

My other point is that I personally don't run on young bulls if I don't think they make the grade - they are castrated and in the freezer. I am certainly not going to breed them to some of my pedigree cows to see what the calves are like. If I do use a young bull and his progeny are only good for the freezer then he is most likely going to follow them there. BUT, I do have a pedigree bull (our first bull purchase) that produces small birth weight, early maturing, beef animals - and he is kept as a commercial bull for beef. On the odd occasion if he throws a good purebred heifer then she will be registered, but he is my commercial breeder and he IS NOT producing what I consider to be dual purpose animals and I will never sell him as a stud bull and I can't see us ever keeping a bull calf by him. We are lucky that we have the space to run 2 distinct herd groups, however, as we get more involved and appreciative of the Dexter Breed my hope is that over time this will become a herd of true dual purpose animals that are true to the breed standard but are still able to fulfill the commercial side of the herd - whether it will happen remains to be seen, and is a LONG way down the track.

Having said all the above we have a standard that needs to be there for people to breed to, you want people to be able to look at a dexter an KNOW it is a dexter, not just maybe a small angus etc. Of course we have the Low-Line Angus in Australia and I really want to know that my black dexters are not being confused with them (the non-commercial ones that is!).

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:28 am

Kirk - OK so my wife's selection process was flawed. As long as she doesn't find out I'm happy. I agree with what you say. It's not black and white, it's shades of grey, as always. I bought a bit of a runt of a tup from a famous line last year for a few hundred pounds, his half-brothers went for thousands at the same sale. His lambs are first-class. He was a runt largely because of his start in life, not his breeding.

Rebecca - You mentioned beef. I wouldn't assume Elite means good for beef because I don't think that's the case.

Sylvia · Post by **Sylvia** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:00 pm

Funny how a considerable amount of women say that it was his sense of humour which attracted them to their partner. Looking at some couples one feels it has to be something other than looks. However beauty (as we all know) is in the eye of the beholder which makes trying to stick to a 'breed standard' #### nigh impossible. This is not a call to scrap the Dexter Breed standard, just a reminder that comparing breeding Dexters to human behaviour will take us down a road which is almost certainly better left untrod.

Sylvia · Post by **Sylvia** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:00 pm

Funny how a considerable amount of women say that it was his sense of humour which attracted them to their partner. Looking at some couples one feels it has to be something other than looks. However beauty (as we all know) is in the eye of the beholder which makes trying to stick to a 'breed standard' #### nigh impossible. This is not a call to scrap the Dexter Breed standard, just a reminder that comparing breeding Dexters to human behaviour will take us down a road which is almost certainly better left untrod.

Sylvia · Post by **Sylvia** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:04 pm

And no, I didn't think that was important enough to put on twice. It said it hadn't worked the first time. :p

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 5:06 pm

All of the above is why I choose not to breed and keep my own bull. I think bull breeding is for more serious breeders than I. As I have stated in the past I keep my cows for more comercial reasons than showing, I am never going to be able to trawl through pedigrees etc. as it is not what I am interested in. When I require a bull I will purchase from a serious Dexter breeder that is far more knowledgable than me, and my selection will be on an inspection of the herd that he comes from (as well as looks, as I couldn't keep an ugly bull). Until we as a society start using performance figures like other breed societies I'm afraid visual inspection of type, sire, dam and cohorts is all we have to go on.
Martin. Medway Valley Dexters, Kent