Cattle Size - Breeding Effects

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:49 am

Hi Marion

How long did it take you to get height down using non-carriers and what approx height did you start at? Have you got any pics?

Edited By Broomcroft on 1213254608

marcus · Post by **marcus** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:25 pm

what is the problem?, there is room for both short and non- short,each have a place. As long as you do,nt breed short to short.
If you put short on non- short the percentage of short- legged calves is usually small, and you can always beef them if you do,nt want them, in my experience they are usually the best for beef, they are easier to finish and the difference in carcase size is nowhere near as big as you would imagine.

marion · Post by **marion** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:48 pm

Hi Clive, I only have a small group and from my first group selected a foundation cow for her lovely udder and balanced conformation. She was about 42 1/2 inches. Daughters ranged from 39 to 41 inches using bulls who matured no more than 44 inches. Even with full sisters there is variation, and one cow consistently produced smaller offspring. It is her daughter that is 39 inches. Bred her to a bull whos 40 inch dam always had small calves, and I'm delighted with her new calf. He is small and surprisingly heavy.
A friend has a 39 inch cow, from a 41 inch dam and the sire matured 49 inches. So, heredity is not always logical!
I'll try to find some pics, and I need to get a good one of cow and new babe..marion

marion · Post by **marion** » Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:56 pm

And I'd like to add...it's wonderful that we now have the test for chondro. I tested my foundation cow. Her first heifer here (sired by a bull of woodmagic lineage), was so small and heavy-set the buyer was worried she might be a carrier. I was sure the dam was a non-carrier but with testing just that one cow, I can now guarantee that her 14 plus descendants from non-carrier bulls are all non-carriers.
I have also noticed that the heifer you might choose to keep as a calf, is not necessarily the one you would pick as a yearling or two year old..marion

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:47 am

My experience is not the same as your marcus. Although I have a large herd, so far I've only had two bulls, a carrier and a non-carrier. The carrier gave me widely differing sizes right from a huge steer that has just gone to the butcher who remarked it was like a small Hereford, right down to a miniscule and stunted heifer that is quite honestly of no use. I am beefing her in the next 2 months so it'll be interesting what we get. We actually had almost nothing that you would call consistent or normal from that first bull out of about 40 calves. He was actually a big bull stunted by the dwarf gene, so when you bred from him you saw what he really was. That is a practical example of one of the main problems being alluded to. i.e. I'm commercially producing Dexter Beef and I can't with that sort of thing going on.

The shorts and non-short calves by him when put to a non-short cow were approx 50/50, which is how it should be isn't it?

I also have a whole batch of carrier cows that produce similar differing results from being put to my non-carrier bull, but these results are nowhere near the dramatic variations I got from the short bull on long cows. I assume that is because with the bull, what you see is what you get, with a few surprises every now and again.

In terms of finishing, the smaller animals have the advantage of finishing very easily especially on poor grazing, so in those terms there is a good position for them for home beef. But the larger ones finish just as well on my farm. It's just a matter of them needing more intake, and here they get clover fields and they will finish at 24-26 months regardless of the size within reason...on grass they would finish a few months' later.

Edited By Broomcroft on 1213349687

Kathleen · Post by **Kathleen** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:28 am

I agree with Mark Bowles.

But to be more precise - I have no interested in 'miniturizing' longlegs.

As has already been mentioned in this thread, I think there are more important things that need 'fixing' in Dexters - like conformation and dual purpose attributes.

But here is a thought - those who are not interested in breeding shortleg (and longleg) Dexters could start their own assoication. Thus it would only take one 'generation' for them to eliminate the Dexter chondrodysplasia gene.

Edited By Kathleen on 1213349045

marcus · Post by **marcus** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:18 pm

Nobody is making anybody use short-legged dexters if they do,nt want to. By the same token nobody should stop anyone if they wish to
There are a lot of other ways the breed could be improved without worrying about something that is after all a matter of choice.

marcus · Post by **marcus** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:58 pm

In reply to Broomcroft, you cannot judge just by two bulls,there are good and bad breeders in both short and non-short.I had the worst calf I ever had last year,I had a job to keep it alive as a calf and later wished I had,nt bothered as I ended up taking it to the kennels because it was that bad!.
This calf was out of a good bodied non-short heifer, by a good non-short bull.
Also, the best non-short I have is by a short-leg.

wagra · Post by **wagra** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:50 pm

As there are still avid carrier fanciers in the various societies, rather than cause animosity by threatening extermination, perhaps a continuing education program should be made standard, so that no new Dexter buyers have any misunderstandings or underestimations about the possible consequences of short-to-short matings.

Warnings could be put on the back of carrier cattle registration certificates, with colour photos of bulldog abortions, much like cigarette packet warnings.

Gross? Nowhere near as gross or tragic as some of the bulldog photos in my files.

Rutherford · Post by **Rutherford** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:27 pm

The problem for a ‘short leg’ Association is that it would be unable to confine itself, half the calves born would have to be long, and the bulls would have to be the dreaded long, otherwise twenty five per cent on average would be born dead. The latter prospect would be going down the road of extermination to which the breed was nearly consigned forty odd years ago.
Beryl (Woodmagic)

Louisa Gidney · Post by **Louisa Gidney** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:01 pm

Saffy, going back to your query at the top of this page, I've found a paper with a formula for calculating this. Unfortunately it needs someone who is very good at algebra, which I'm not. If anyone wants to have a go and has access to JSTOR, PM me for the reference.

Ken Hobbs · Post by **Ken Hobbs** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:48 pm

Can I ask the question, how many animals/calves have been lost in the last, say five years, to the gene? and are we making to much of a fuss over it, and putting potential new comers to the breed off?

ann · Post by **ann** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:15 pm

I recently visit Veronica Schofield of Harron Dexters and she has the smallest non short I have every seen, it could hold its own any day among the shorts and this is form a line which has been non short for years. If you ever get the chance to go to Oz go and look at their dexters and many of them have been graded up and they have some lovely non short cattle who can hold their own in the inter breed classes. On the other end of the scale I have a lovely short legged cow who you would not think was thus if she didn't produce the old short leg. I have not had a short legged bull on the place for years but because my first bull and one of my foundation cows was short, 20yrs on I still have a few on the place and these will stay here until they go to the big place in the sky. However I will not replace them as I find the non shorts so much more consistent in their breeding patterns and much easier for new comers to deal with. I don't have a problem with people breeding for the short leg as long as the animal they breed is sound, however as long as breeders chose to follow this lottery they must either beef all the non shorts they breed or find new owners for these animals and it is a proven fact that a short to a non short often produces the biggest non shorts so until the dexter cattle soc can mark on every registration card which relatives are non short, any new comer will be back to square one if they want to breed non shorts in respect of getting the size down to the standard Berl and Veronica have achieved. Fortunetly for us non short breeders 90% of new comers to Dexters in the North that I have met prefer the non shorts as to people who are familiar with cows they are the perfect miniature.

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:58 am

I have line-bred my bull to his daughter now twice. Both offspring are very good quality and both are smaller than you would expect (non-shorts). The little bull calve is exceptional and totally red, but of course I have steered him!

I have heard in sheep that line-breeding brings down the size, is that the same in Dexters and cattle generally?

And would this reduction be passed on to their offspring? Or would progeny revert back to the grandparents size?

Edited By Broomcroft on 1214647564

Sylvia · Post by **Sylvia** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:25 am

I line-bred pygmy goats for years because it was so difficult to find unrelated stock in those days but noticed no significant reduction in the size of kids, which grew to the same size as their parents.