When is a Dexter not a Dexter? - That is the question...

Peter thornton · Post by **Peter thornton** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:25 pm

You know, anyone outside the Society, reading thgrough this discussion, would find it very hard to take this breed seriously.
The Dexter will never make progress as a breed until we stop accepting animals with an abnormality - albeit one which makes them "cute".
One day, one of the National Dexter Societies is going to have the courage to do this and to establish a national Herd which can be brought up to a level of constistency sadly lacking at present.
And yes, I'm aware of the dangers of trying to make the breed too "tight"

ann · Post by **ann** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:49 pm

this discussion is getting quite intresting. I am very curious as to how any one with a policy of consistantly putting long to short is going to produce animals within the standard. I assume that any female animals who turn out to be either under 38" or over 44" they either eat or sell on thus perpetuating the big variation we currently have. If you show a female of 44" and some one else shows on of 36" guess who wins in 90% of the time. I have experienced judges who don't even look at non short dexters when it comes to pulling the winners out, prefering to putting cattle with deformed hocks in front of

non shorts with perfectly formed lower limbs.
I would like to see every animal who is given the honour of having their photo's in the herd book also have their height measured and put on the page with their pedigree. this should also be done for all A.I bulls this way people would get more of an informed idea. It should also be compulsory for all animals which are sold at Melton Mowbray to be officially measured.
However if you are only interested in producing top quality meat and wish to be commercial then you are going to breed only non shorts and will if you follow this policy for several generations find you will get a very consistent herd size wise as long as you can find a quality bull who is not from a X of short to non short.
Unfortunately at the moment unless the parents of the animals are both BD1-N certified you can be flying in the dark. Hopefully one day we may arrive at this situation but looking in the current herd book very few animals are even being inspected these days. And I am as guilty on this one as I have become disillusioned on this front and currently only have one of my current bulls with a *. so thats one for the new council to sort out.
I will now retreat behind my flame proof vest VBG

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:35 pm

Before you retreat Ann, what's a bull with one * ?

Edited By Broomcroft on 1231612691

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:52 am

Slightly off the subject, but I wonder how many people would like to see chondro being bred out of the dexter? If there are sufficient in number, then all that has to be done is for someone or a group, can't remember, to call for an EGM on the matter (say) to alter the Objects to "breed out chondro" or some such wording. The council would then have to hold an EGM and send out papers including a proxy voting form, and if successful by a 75% majority then the new Objects of the Society would need to be approved by the Charity Commission, which would be very straight forward, and Bob's your uncle, end of chondro if that's what you want to achieve. You'd get my vote, not for a witch hunt, but for a gradual breeding out of the gene.

The Society os supposed to follow the Objects as they are, and they say will improve the breed. How can using or allowing a faulty gene be an improvement? So the society is not complying with the current Objects.

Edited By Broomcroft on 1231667763

Post by **Mark Bowles** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:20 pm

LizD, your question to me is all ifs and buts.
You have a carrier of **", how can you relate that to an equivalent non-carrier, not possible! You have what you have, thats it, it either conforms or not.

Liz D · Post by **Liz D** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:53 pm

Sorry Marc but I don't think that it is if's or but's, please corect me if I am mistaken but wasn't it found in the Cavanaugh Study that there was aproximately 5" shortened cannon bone in a carrier cow and 8" in a carrier bull? Perhaps I am a little off with the numbers and if so excuse me, but that is my understanding. Liz

Woodmagic · Post by **Woodmagic** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:16 pm

It is impossible to establish the size of the prospective progeny in the case of a chondro mixed mating. The size will vary whenever a chondro-affected animal is used. The only certainty is that if the calf does not inherit the chondro abnormality it has to be bigger than its ‘short leg’ parent. Depending on what it also inherits from the other parent, previous sound progeny should give some guide. It can be argued that if it is desired to improve the Dexter it is necessary to breed in such a fashion that one can be certain of size. . Breed long to long and you will know you can reduce or maintain the size as you choose; breed to the short and you take potluck every time. It cannot really be considered breeding since it is a pure gamble.
Beryl (Woodmagic)

ann · Post by **ann** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 8:04 pm

Hi Clive * is for a bull thats passed the stage one inspection

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:33 pm

I don't see it being as straight forward as 'Bob's your uncle.' There has to be at least half the members in the Society breeding from short-leg Dexters. Clive's suggestion would decimate the breed as we know it today.

Where would we get the replacements from? There simply would not be sufficient herds around like Beryl's or Veronica's to replace the much loved short-leg cow.

We were recently discussing Dexters with fellow breeders and it was stated that during a conversation with a perspective new breeder that Dexters were getting too big. I personally feel that putting non-short to non-short is not a replacement for the short-leg cow; it will give something that is bigger than today's breed standard.

I disagree with Ann when she says that consistently putting non-short to short will not produce animals within the breed standard. We have been breeding this way for the past 18 years and have animals that are like peas in a pod / of breed standard. We very rarely get an extreme of either type. I am a great believer in the non-short to short mating and would advise breeders who wish to continue breeding from their short cows or short bulls to do the same.

Alison and I extend an open invitation to anyone who would like to view our cattle this summer to get in touch.

Furthermore, those of us who have been using non-short to short matings over a number of years have shown that we can 'live' with this gene, being responsible breeders and having improved the breed in this respect from the days when there were many chondro births.

Robert Kirk
Boram Dexters

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:58 pm

Can I ask you a question Rob? The science is that a dwarf Dexter, or a dwarf anything for that matter, is a normal mammal that has been affected by a faulty gene that reduces it's size and in practice that is what everyone I have ever met agrees with, even those who want to breed dwarfs. But my question is, what do you think it is? A different breed or what?

You describe your herd as short and non-short but then go on to say how you have a level herd!!! I do not understand. Do you have a special ruler?

Edited By Broomcroft on 1231711241

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:43 pm

Clive.......We're farmers, not scientists, We went into Dexters because we liked the size of the cows we were looking at and at that time they were short-legs. We were advised the non-shorts were better used as foundation cows, put to a short leg bull to hopefully produce short-leg heifers and the dwarfing gene never entered into our heads. Dexters have always been a small breed and that is how they are recognised. We look upon our cattle as traditional Dexters.

As regards the term 'level herd,' our breeding policy is the fact that we use both non-short and short leg bulls on opposite size cows, so our animals remain within the breed standard.

Do what we have done, decide on your breeding policy and go for it.

Best wishes
Robert

Broomcroft · Post by **Broomcroft** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:27 am

So in other words, your herd isn't level?

Rob & Alison Kirk · Post by **Rob & Alison Kirk** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:12 am

Clive - Take a look at the photograph we have on DBO...there are short and non-short animals in that group. This photograph was taken some three years ago and animals we produce today are exactly the same.

We haven't got extremes of either.

Best you visit us sometime.

Alison

Ken Hobbs · Post by **Ken Hobbs** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:14 am

I think most individuals are drawn to the Dexter because of compact size, if we ignore the breed standards, will we end up with the Dexter the size of the imported Angus? I suppose those who breed totatly for commercial sales will be happy that they can produce a carcass twice the size of the of that we are producing today and still brand it as Dexter!! but the majority of members will want original compact version.

Saffy · Post by **Saffy** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:29 am

Does the enormous Angus taste as good as the little Angus used too I wonder? I cannot help but think that it does not, as I believe that there is something fundamental in the smallness of these breeds that makes them taste good as well as have such interesting characters.

So - yes if we go big there will be a big beef carcass but I don't think it will have such a deep, defining Dexter flavour.

I am quite new to eating Dexter and having bred and eaten the beef off this farm all my life I know now that Dexter really does taste better and I don't want anything else in the freezer!

Stephanie