Dexters - Filling a wide niche

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 2:54 pm

Beryl - I think there may be a misunderstanding, otherwise I don't understand. The cows I measured could in no way be considered big when compared to what I have seen out there. But they are non-shorts nevertheless. My measuring may be not so hot (done quickly by hand, but on concrete but a moving target). And I referred to Redberry as a datum, I'm not using him. Joseph my main bull, is smaller in every direction and actually throws calves that are smaller than my first short bull who produced enormous steers and tiny heifers (usually). My point was that if Redberry Prince is on the limit for a bull (which is what I was told) then Joseph must be well within.

Because of my experience with my short bull throwing very large and small offspring, extreme inconsistency, I have, rightly or wrongly avoided short bulls since.

I'll measure Joseph when I can.

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:32 pm

At the World Congress of ’98 a world standard was agreed cows 38” – 42” a rump, and bulls 40” – 44” at rump, this already increased the original preferred size, sadly it is creeping upwards. I still think in terms of withers heights since we used this originally, although I agree the rump can give a more accurate comparison. The weight used to be 600lbs for a five year mature cow and 800lbs for a mature bull. Measurements should be for an animal of five years, not as some folks believe two years, when they still have a lot of growing to do. 5” variation is providing an enormous variation in size, much more than the impression one tends to receive. I can’t see the tallest ones having beef unless they weigh out at a lot more than 600 lbs.

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:53 pm

Clive your posting just preceded mine and I hadn’t seen it. I should be very interested to know the measurements of Joseph. Your cows are certainly not the size of some that are today being bred as ‘Dexters’, but I did feel that putting them, already getting bigger, to something the size of Prince was working upwards, and that is the danger I fear, the gradual imperceptible increase which can leave one unaware until too late. While you have something of his size being accepted as within the guidelines, it doesn’t leave me very optimistic for the future. Yes, I do know the problems of trying to measure a moving target!
You are absolutely right on the use of a non-short bull. Joseph should give you much more consistent stock, but if put to a short leg cow you could still get some surprises, it takes two to tango.

Kirk- Cascade Herd US · Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:13 pm

Broomcroft wrote:Joseph my main bull, is smaller in every direction and actually throws calves that are smaller than my first short bull who produced enormous steers and tiny heifers (usually).

Just based on the photos of Joseph, I think he's an excellent bull. Sounds like he throws great calves too.

Kirk- Cascade Herd US · Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:59 pm

wagra dexters wrote:We do have a couple of smaller cows but I cringe when it comes to their turn for AI, not because they have any difficulty calving, but because my back is getting too old.

In a continuing quest to understand the various size preferences, I wonder about this: My own height preference for Dexters is based on how the animals feel as I work with them, milk them, stand next to them, give them shots, dress them out, etc.. There is a size that just feels right to me regardless of a measuring tape. That preferred size is based on a relationship to my own height and build. I like the animals that are belly button high while I'm wearing farm boots. I am 6' tall, if I were a rather smaller, I might prefer even smaller animals. It was the manageability of Dexters, that first made me consider them, not a statistical number from a measuring tape.

It would be interesting to compare human breeder heights and weights to those same owner/breeder's preferred animal heights and weights. If the size of Dexters has been creeping upwards, I wonder if that's due in part to the heights/sizes of farmers creeping upwards. I know that my generation was much taller than our parent's generation. I remember being a teenager and most all of us were bypassing our parents who were born in the 1920's/1930's.

What do you think?

Kirk

Duncan MacIntyre · Post by **Duncan MacIntyre** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 5:32 pm

Kirk,

I have been a member of the DCS for well over 20 years, and I can think of Dexter owners and breeders of all shapes and sizes ....... but it might be dangerous to get into too much detail of exact heights and weights especially given the number of ladies amongst society members. However you could come to the AGM and do some weighing yourself.

I do know one breeder well who has offspring varying from 6ft 1inch, over 280lb, to 5ft 1inch and probably half the weight. I remember hearing on the radio one day that only 3% of men alive today are shorter than their fathers. I am one of them. The Dexter herd is much more consistent.

Duncan

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 5:34 pm

As you were typing your response Kirk, What was I doing? Comparing my cows to my belly-button. So the belly-button seems to be a key factor here! I'm only a weed at 5'9" and my cows are generally just above or just below my BB (that's at the top of the withers which I assume is the correct place).

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:09 pm

What happens when you shrink with old age as I have, but I am sticking to the 40"!

Duncan MacIntyre · Post by **Duncan MacIntyre** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:55 pm

Beryl, your attitude just proves how unshiftable you are, which is just as well as few would have stuck to their convictions for as long as you have, often taking a lot of stick for doing so.

Strangely enough if I work out the average of my offsprings' heights it comes out at 5'7", just my own height.

Duncan, obviously heterozygous for something.

Kirk- Cascade Herd US · Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:46 pm

I read a study recently that said that human heights started to reverse in children born in the 1980's. The theory presented was that in first-world countries, nutrition for children peaked in the 1950's and 60's and junk food started entering the picture in the 1970's, becoming a mainstay in the 1980's/ 1990's. Kids are now shorter and more obese. Empty calories won't grow frame and muscle, but it will grow fat.

Back to belly buttons - it would seem that a 3 inch height difference in two males (6' vs. 5'9") would add up to only a 1.5 inch height difference at the belly button on average (because it's sort of at a half way point). But concerning Woodmagic's reply, I remeasured myself since I'm now gaining in age, and I'm only 5'11'' so shrinkage is taking its toll on me too. So perhaps there's only 1" difference in my belly and Broomcroft's.

Doesn't it make sense that a person who is 8 inches shorter than me would require a cow to be 4 inches shorter than my cows in order to have the same relationship with the animal?

Duncan MacIntyre · Post by **Duncan MacIntyre** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:54 pm

Oh well, there we all were thinking Broomcroft and Kirk were thousands of miles apart and now all is revealed - their navels are only 1" away. Are we all navel gazing now??????????

Duncan

wagra dexters · Post by **wagra dexters** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:43 am

We have a preferrence for a T shaped adjustable measuring stick with a spirit level in the cross bar. I will admit, though, that I used to use my point-of-hip, which is 107 cm.

wagra dexters · Post by **wagra dexters** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:27 am

Errata! 'Preference' that is.

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:35 am

Sorry, correction. Just been to the doctors and been weighed, and according to my weight I must be 6'8".

Also, I just measured Joseph my stock bull and he is approx 46" at the rump. That was rough in the field but sounds about right.

Kirk- Cascade Herd US · Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:28 pm

Broomcroft wrote:Sorry, correction. Just been to the doctors and been weighed, and according to my weight I must be 6'8".

Also, I just measured Joseph my stock bull and he is approx 46" at the rump. That was rough in the field but sounds about right.

Maybe if Broomcroft cuts out desserts, he'll stop hitting his head on the tops of doorways....

Checking Joseph's height against frame scoring tables puts him at less than a frame score of 1. In cattledom, that's considered very very small. Frame score tables have a score of 1-9, but usually cattle people talk of the scores going from 2 at the bottom to 9 at the top. Do an internet search on cattle frame scores and you will see lots of information. Anything under 2 is practically considered as non-cattle by most cattle people. Between 2 and 3 is considered very small, 4-6 small to moderate, and 7-9 large. Via interpolation, a mature 46" dexter bull would be a frame score of about 0, incredibly (laughably) tiny according to general cattle standards. I just say this to underscore the fact that what some Dexter breeders consider as large, most cattle people consider as off-the-charts toys.

Here's a link:

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/therio/Hip ... oring.html