May I make it quite clear that it is NOT my stage 2 bull, "Moomin Posh" who has anomalies with his parental verification.
I wondered why I was being asked about his DNA status at the weekend. I received my bulletin on Monday and I realised the reason.
The recent statement by council has cast doubts on ALL Stage 2 bulls parental verification.
This statement could cause a loss of sales to all of us who sell semen, and therefore affect our businesses.
I resent the implication that there could have been a parental verification problem with either of my AI bulls and that my breeding integrity over the past 30 years could be in doubt!
Di Smith
Bull DNA
I was both saddened & appalled at the self righteous/self centred resposes to the stage 2 bull with parentage problems. Being involved directly (we have a heifer sired by the bull in question) I am aware of some of the FACTS,& would point out:
1. The sire of the bull in question (lets add to the mystery & call him X!) was hired from a large herd owner in 1998 & remained with the hirer for more than a year.
2. Bull X was inspected by 2 bull inspectors & passed stage 1 & 2. It was following parent verification & chondrodysplasia tests the DCS notified the breeder of bull X of the discrepancy, who subsequently paid for a further set of tests which still DID NOT identify the sire. At this point the matter was left in the hands of the DCS.
3. The DCS diligently carried out further investigations, which have resulted in the sire of bull X being identified & proved the breeder of bull X to be totally blameless.
4. Bull X's breeder has suffered considerable expense & stress (not to mention demands for compensation) & deserves our sympathy, not the vilification & "rumour mongering" which are currently apparent.
There are also the "knock on" effects to consider. What about the animals that were sired by the bull (named as the sire of bull X on the service certificates) that has proved not to be the sire of bull X?? Surely the pedigreesof these animals must also be incorrect?
We must have faith in the DCS (& its council) to sort this horrible muddle out & put in place what safeguards they feel are necessary, so that such a situation cannot occur again.
1. The sire of the bull in question (lets add to the mystery & call him X!) was hired from a large herd owner in 1998 & remained with the hirer for more than a year.
2. Bull X was inspected by 2 bull inspectors & passed stage 1 & 2. It was following parent verification & chondrodysplasia tests the DCS notified the breeder of bull X of the discrepancy, who subsequently paid for a further set of tests which still DID NOT identify the sire. At this point the matter was left in the hands of the DCS.
3. The DCS diligently carried out further investigations, which have resulted in the sire of bull X being identified & proved the breeder of bull X to be totally blameless.
4. Bull X's breeder has suffered considerable expense & stress (not to mention demands for compensation) & deserves our sympathy, not the vilification & "rumour mongering" which are currently apparent.
There are also the "knock on" effects to consider. What about the animals that were sired by the bull (named as the sire of bull X on the service certificates) that has proved not to be the sire of bull X?? Surely the pedigreesof these animals must also be incorrect?
We must have faith in the DCS (& its council) to sort this horrible muddle out & put in place what safeguards they feel are necessary, so that such a situation cannot occur again.
-
Peter thornton
- Posts: 326
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:41 pm
I don't want to make light of this situation, but let's remember that this kind of thing has happened ever since cattlemen started selective breeding. The fact is that we have only now been able to verify parentage.
As you rightly say, it's a muddle that will take a lot of sorting out.
Now this is only one case. How many more do you suppose are out there? If we start digging into all of this then we'll need subs at ten times present level just to sort it all out!!!
In the end, pedigrees ARE important, bust just as important is the ability to look at an animal and judge it on its own merits.
Let's not get too hung up about all of this
As you rightly say, it's a muddle that will take a lot of sorting out.
Now this is only one case. How many more do you suppose are out there? If we start digging into all of this then we'll need subs at ten times present level just to sort it all out!!!
In the end, pedigrees ARE important, bust just as important is the ability to look at an animal and judge it on its own merits.
Let's not get too hung up about all of this
I don't think that there are many of us who don't have anything but a huge amount of sympathy for the owner of bull "X". If you are in contact with them Steve, please reassure them of this, as it must be a horrific situation to be in. They still have a a bull good enough to be Stage 2, but I agree that there may be many pedigree certificates to sort out and that will be a problem for the Society. I did not get the impression that people on this site were attacking the owner, just proclaiming their lack of involvement .This is understandable due to the secrecy so far, as it will put all Stage 2 bulls under suspicion and affect sales of semen etc. for any owners of these bulls.
-
Stuart Tarrant
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 7:59 am
Steve,
Who is doing the 'rumour mongering' and who is starting the blame process ?
In the absence as yet of a full DCS statement I am afraid that I have to point out that some of your statements are misleading.
Who picked up Bull X from a third party location without an ear tag on it? How in the circumstances could it be checked to the passport? Who eventually put an ear tag on Bull X?
Yes, Bull X has been identified but there is now considerable uncertainty as to who he is.
Stuart
Who is doing the 'rumour mongering' and who is starting the blame process ?
In the absence as yet of a full DCS statement I am afraid that I have to point out that some of your statements are misleading.
Who picked up Bull X from a third party location without an ear tag on it? How in the circumstances could it be checked to the passport? Who eventually put an ear tag on Bull X?
Yes, Bull X has been identified but there is now considerable uncertainty as to who he is.
Stuart
-
Stuart Tarrant
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 7:59 am
Surely by looking at Bull X's DNA, you can figure out who Bull Y was? There must be only a very few possibilities of the identity of Bull Y. The original owner of Bull X would know which prospective Bull Ys were within available range of Bull X's Mother. Once the actual Sire of Bull X is worked out, his pedigree can be corrected and all can be put in order again.
By the sounds of it, Bull X is an exceptional looking bull, so his altered pedigree shouldn't change the fact that his semen is still worth using. Its best to correct mistakes in an animal's pedigree as soon as possible and then carry on. It doesn't need to be a big scandel. Mistakes can happen. But with the DNA of bulls being kept on file, they can be quickly sorted out. Teething problems with introducing a new system are to be expected, but I'm sure they will remain uncommon. Its just handy to have such a record to call on, in case its ever needed to identify the Sire of a calf.
By the sounds of it, Bull X is an exceptional looking bull, so his altered pedigree shouldn't change the fact that his semen is still worth using. Its best to correct mistakes in an animal's pedigree as soon as possible and then carry on. It doesn't need to be a big scandel. Mistakes can happen. But with the DNA of bulls being kept on file, they can be quickly sorted out. Teething problems with introducing a new system are to be expected, but I'm sure they will remain uncommon. Its just handy to have such a record to call on, in case its ever needed to identify the Sire of a calf.
Inger
NZ
NZ
-
Stuart Tarrant
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 7:59 am
Inger,
It depends on whether Grand sires and grand dams of Bull X are still alive as well as how many cattle were in the original herd at that time.
Yes, I agree that genuine mistakes will continue to occur until DNA parent verification is fully implemented but it has to be done in stages and it will take time.
My two Stage 2 bulls were DNA parent verified BEFORE I committed to the AI process and to hiring them out, unlike Bull X.
It is sad to see Steve raising the spectre of compensation before all the facts have been made public.
The current challenge for DCS is to educate our membership on the advantages of DNA parent verification
Stuart
It depends on whether Grand sires and grand dams of Bull X are still alive as well as how many cattle were in the original herd at that time.
Yes, I agree that genuine mistakes will continue to occur until DNA parent verification is fully implemented but it has to be done in stages and it will take time.
My two Stage 2 bulls were DNA parent verified BEFORE I committed to the AI process and to hiring them out, unlike Bull X.
It is sad to see Steve raising the spectre of compensation before all the facts have been made public.
The current challenge for DCS is to educate our membership on the advantages of DNA parent verification
Stuart
I make a final submission on this topic in reply to Stuart, as the word used was "blameless" - used as defined in the 9th Consise Oxford Dictionary - to mean "innocent or free from blame". I chose this particularly as it was initially suggested that bull X may have been sired by an incorrectly castrated steer, or even a bull from another breed!
With regard to your passport/ear tag observation, I believe that cattle born prior to 1996 were not issued with CTS registration documents until September 2000, when the "Cattle Count 2000" exercise was carried out. It was not until January 2001 that CTS certificates had to accompany these older animals when they moved. As to the ear tag, I understand that the hired bull was tattooed (therefore not requiring an ear tag), but as anyone who has tried to read a tattoo in a hairy black ear knows, unless white tattoo paste is used it is often impossible.
As regards to the "spectre" of compensation, you can be assured that the subject was not raised by me, however I do know that the breeder of "bull X" has been approached for compensation.
Finally there was no requirement that bulls put on AI were DNA parent verified, & bull X was submitted for verification voluntarily. How fortunate that you possessed such foresight in the case of your two bulls.
???
With regard to your passport/ear tag observation, I believe that cattle born prior to 1996 were not issued with CTS registration documents until September 2000, when the "Cattle Count 2000" exercise was carried out. It was not until January 2001 that CTS certificates had to accompany these older animals when they moved. As to the ear tag, I understand that the hired bull was tattooed (therefore not requiring an ear tag), but as anyone who has tried to read a tattoo in a hairy black ear knows, unless white tattoo paste is used it is often impossible.
As regards to the "spectre" of compensation, you can be assured that the subject was not raised by me, however I do know that the breeder of "bull X" has been approached for compensation.
Finally there was no requirement that bulls put on AI were DNA parent verified, & bull X was submitted for verification voluntarily. How fortunate that you possessed such foresight in the case of your two bulls.
???