Bulletin Readers Letter

Tricky · Post by **Tricky** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:54 am

Hi all, Newby to the site and hopefully soon to be Dexter owner, only a couple though.
Getting a sense of Deja Vu with the size argument, used to breed Angus and with the introduction of Canadian bloodlines size became all the rage, too, in my opinion, the detriment of shape and fleshing ability.
Surely with in the "breed standard", you want cattle you take pleasure in looking at while leaning on the gate. Cattle that do a job for you on your land and management system, and if they're different to the blokes next door then you've got something to talk about to.
As the fresh air underneath taller animals doesn't way alot, i always found a small good bodied cow weighed as much as a taller one and could produce as heavier calf at weaning.

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:59 am

Hi Tricky and welcome aboard. Great to have new people.

My reason for asking the weight question was that there is a rule of thumb for grass-finishing of cattle, according to the experts, and wondered how that compared with the Dexter at the top end of the breed standard. Obviously, there's no point in comparing Dexters in the middle or lower end.

I take on board exactly what is said. My "biggest" cow is a short one, she just happen to have shorter legs than my tallest cow, who's pushing the standard or might even be just over. She's unique in my herd before anyone jumps to conclusions! And my biggest (in every way) steers, by quite a margin, are by my shortest bull.

Anybody know weights of cows?

Saffy · Post by **Saffy** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:55 am

I didn't make myself terribly clear in my previous post - sorry.

The animal that was offered for sale to me did not have particularly obvious "long leg" looks. She was very well proportioned, a very nice beef type animal but altogether bigger than I expected a Dexter to be.

Now I know a little more I realise that she probably would have also been higher than a Dexter female should have been.

Stephanie

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:05 pm

The breed standard is a sore point with me, it was agreed by all the Societies at the ’98 Congress, but has since been stretched by some. My animals fall well within it, averaging with little variation around 40” – 41” at the withers, and weighing probably 6 ½ hundredweight, when in breeding condition, sorry, metric is a foreign language.

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:07 pm

Should have said, bulls will be more, up to 2", and 2 cwt.

welshdexterboy · Post by **welshdexterboy** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:20 pm

is the wither the point of measurement? i was told that it was the hook bone but that doesn't make sense to me, the wither is a far more consistent measurement spot. I also think it is justifiable to have a lower limit for hight as well.or is there one already?

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:07 pm

The size issue is a bit of a nightmare. Especially when you consider how I think Kirk put it, that the chondo (dwarf) gene hides what may actually be a much larger animal. So you're nice little Dexter is actually a large Dexter dwarfed by the gene. Hope I've got that right? I remark on this matter with fear and trepidation and I am fully expecting to be shot down in flames.

I've got two "little" cows that I now realise are actually big ones but dwarfed. They produce probably my biggest youngsters, all of whom go to the butcher now even though they are still probably within the standard.

I'd like to understand a lot more about chondo, at some time in the future.

AlisonKirk · Post by **AlisonKirk** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:11 pm

Dexters have always been a small dual purpose breed and I cannot understand why people get into Dexters and then decide they want them bigger. I presume it's because Dexter beef is the best there is and we're all in agreement with that.

Boram Dexter Herd has both short and non-short (up to breed standard as set by DCS). Pub/restaurants in the North Cotswolds are now taking the whole carcuss cut to their individual chef's requirements. Carcass size is ideal for chef's to take everything and they're happy to take one animal per month.
Private customers keep asking for more beef, so we're increasing our breeding females from within the herd.

We're getting a decent return for our beef out of a small breed of cow. We certainly would not wish to be back into commercial farming with bigger cattle, which in turn means higher production costs for the finished product, with a lesser return than we're getting for our Dexter beef.

Ask yourself, if breeders are producing bigger Dexters by say, putting non-short onto non-short, will the beef still be as good? Will the texture remain the same and will chefs be able to tell the difference? I think there is a difference between traditional Angus beef and the modern Canadian influenced Angus beef.

Alison Kirk
Boram Dexters

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:48 pm

The withers always used to be the point of measurement, to be correct they should now be measured at the pin, there is some argument for this, if you think about the crest some bulls will have, it must make a bit of a nonsense as a measurement, but I am afraid old habits die hard!
You are absolutely right Clive. The only effect the bulldog gene has, is to reduce the bone growth, the ‘short leg’ finishes with a skeleton that is not as big as it should be, to match the carcass, and it is the whole skeleton not just the legs. The bone does not necessarily reduce in weight to the same extent, as it does in size. This is the sole effect of the bulldog gene. The short leg will produce a calf carrying its dam’s genes for size, if the calf does not also inherit the bulldog gene, it will come out the size the dam should have been. In every other respect it carries its dam and sire’s genes. The growth or lack of it, in the skeleton, is the sole difference between the two ‘types’; otherwise it is the same animal.
It is a fairly recent innovation, probably going back to the 18th century when they tried ‘improve’ the Celtic cow, probably using a dwarf in the cross.

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:24 pm

So, as I understand it, excepting Woodmagic and maybe other breeders I do not know of, presumably most short leg bulls are carriers?

If, I repeat IF this assumption is correct, then the short leg carrier bull is actually a "bigger animal in disguise". So when put to a long leg, how does this "big animal in diguise" help to keep the size down? Surely, it will actually do the opposite?

Or are most short leg bulls non-carriers?

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:24 am

Unfortunately it is still true at the moment that most short bulls are carriers, although there is a growing effort by some breeders today, to breed small non- carriers. If one wants to breed for size with any certainty, it can only be done using non-carriers. Where a short leg carrier is one parent, the size of the calf remains a gamble.

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:26 am

The author of the leter in question did actually supply their name and address, whether they or the editor chose not to have it published is unknown.
I believe the writer missunderstood the debate on a couple of subjects from this forum, mainly 'Dexters and Beef' from earlier this year. The subject was started by Woodmagic with posts from quite a number of members, we discussed cross breeding for beef and size of cows (size is a constant debate). No conclusions could be drawn from this particular topic as most of the posts although acknowledging the dissadvantage of slaughter charges and the smaller animal never sugested that the breed standard should be changed to allow for larger animals to be registered. It would appear from the letter that open debate should not be allowed, and there was me thinking that that was a good thing.
It is a shame that the name was not published as I believe the writer has an opinion that they felt that should be in the public domain, every post that I put on this site has my name on it and I can easily be traced through the herd book if someone wished to cantact me about my views. If I wanted to be in a secret society I would join DEFRA.

Martin. Medway Valley Dexters.

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:37 am

One last question (probably), which has probably been answered but I missed it, if one parent is a carrier and the other isn't, will the calf have a 50-50 chance of being a carrier, or what?

Martin - I think you're right. Many like to explore and provoke, me included, and if you read the topics without realising it is an open discussion and debate, where you learn from your mistakes BEFORE you make them, you will get the wrong end of the stick half the time.

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:04 am

Yes, providing only one parent is a carrier, the calf can only collect one defunct gene, the short leg parent can throw either their working gene or the bulldog gene, the non short parent can only provide a working gene, so the calf has a 50 – 50 chance of picking up the bulldog gene. Of course, as most now know, if one uses two short parents there is the chance for the calf to pick up a double dose, and arrive as a bulldog.

welshdexterboy · Post by **welshdexterboy** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:17 pm

Am i right to think then that you need to have the BD gene from both parents to have a BD calf? Or is the gene more common in males than females if so does that explain why you get BD calves with some cows and not others when you have used the same bull. Or is it just pure bad luck.