• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Black VS Smokey

Help Support Ranchers.net:

G

George

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2005
Messages
2,344
Reaction score
0
Location
Indiana
I realize that with only about 50 head this is not a good check but I have some registered Charolis cows and some registered Angus cows.

I ran two angus bulls on them all last year as I wanted some Angus heifers to keep back and wanted the smokey calves as the feeders around here like them and I thought I would get bigger calves.

I sold the calves in two groups the first group about 6 weeks ago and when I sold them I weighed the blacks separate. The blacks went about 15# heavier than the smokies but I thought I might just have had a couple that did great and never thought much of it.

I sold the second group today and again weighed the blacks separate and this time the blacks outweighed the smokies by about 35#. I am getting rid of the Charolis as I feel they eat to much anyway but until I weighed the calves separate I would have sworn the smokies would have been heavier.

Now I wonder if my plan of using a Charolis bull on the Angus cows when I get changed over is a good idea or not. I think I will try running an Angus and Charolis together and see which calves weigh the most then go from their. At $1.00 a pound an extra 35# is enough to make me pay attention. ( $35.00 X 26 = $910.00 )
 
I guess my experience was the opposite. My Char calves were outweighing my Black by nearly 50 lb. This went on several calf crops until I gradually have gone all Char because that was what was performing under my conditions and management. If the Blacks are what works for you, you should work that direction. If you don't like the Char cows anyway, feed em up & sell em--someone else might like em better. Don't judge a breed on what one bull has done no matter what breed or whether the performance was good or bad. There is as much difference within a breed as between the breeds.
 
I guess I would have thought the Char calves would be heavier. I agree with Shortgrass that its hard to gauge breed differences. Have you ever tried Charolais bulls on all the cows? Might see a difference there. It's sort of like how one guy would rather use Hereford bulls on Angus cows and the guy down the road likes Angus bulls on Hereford cows.
 
Our vet in W. Montana owned the scale where all the order buyers weighed their calves. He found out that many times the blacks outweighed the Char calves...in that country anyway.

He used to say,
"You need to add 20 lbs. to a Black calf when guessing what he weighs, and deduct 20 lbs. from a Charolais."
 
Saying that Char calves are lighter than Angus is like saying Channel catfish are lighter than Blue catfish.

I have had Chars weigh several hundred pounds heavier than black calves and vice versa.

To judge any breed/breeds by one small group of calves is ridiculous to start with.

I have a very close friend that weaned a Char calf that weighed over 1000 lbs. in 205 days on nothing but grass. I asked him if he had checked to see if that was a record, he said, "heck, I've had them a lot heavier than that."

There are low growth Char bloodlines, just as there are low growth Angus bloodlines.
 
YUP. You'll have no argument from me, Mike. I was just repeating something I thought as interesting. BTW, it wasn't just a small group of calves...it was based on every calf that went out of W. Montana through that scale over a period of several years. But it was just a remark he made...

What is the details of the Char calf that weighed over 1000 lbs? My, my but that IS impressive.
Was that adjusted weight, was that calf raised on its own mother or was it an embroyo transplant? What was it's age in days when it was weighed?
As I say, his weight was impressive. Don't think I've ever heard of an Angus calf that weighed that much at 205 days.

One more little thing I have been chasing around in my head. We are told over and over that single trait selection will get us in trouble. IF a producer buys bulls, or selects females based SOLELY on weaning weights, is that not SINGLE TRAIT SELECTION?

Just curious.
 
Animal Information
M690097
Regnum PH# Name Birthdate
M690097 40 GDR RIO MAC 40 3 December 2003
Sex Male BLD Horn D
% 32/32 DNA SV-C9643
Breeder 800 GARY DILLER SEDALIA KY

Owner 800 GARY DILLER SEDALIA KY


EPD Hrds
Prog
DIP CE
Acc BW
Acc WW
Acc YW
Acc Milk
Acc MCE
Acc MTNL SC
Acc CPrg
UPrg
UHrd CWT
Acc REA
Acc FAT
Acc MARB
Acc
0
0
0 3.5 2.9 49 92 13 2.8 37 1.0 0
0
0 44 0.58 0.008 0.04
BK BK BK BK BK BK PE PE PE PE PE
EPDS Spring 2008
Perf WT ADJ
BIRTH 93
WEANING WEIGHT ADJUSTED - 1007
YEARLING WEIGHT ADJUSTED - 1516


Pedigree
M413653 JWK IMPRESSIVE D040 ET
M460645 WCR PRIME CUT 764 PLD
F704053 WCR MISS EASE 4314
Sire: M620591 LT RIO BLANCO 1234 P
M301580 HCR SENATOR 9052 POLLED
F704694 LT PRAIRIE MAID 4054
F520108 LT PRAIRIE MAIDEN 8016

M301622 HCR MAC 9157 POLLED
M397375 HEP POLLED MAC 8 ET
F503165 HEP MISS JOAN 17W
Dam: F862453 GDR LINDA SUE 39
M397391 HEP SERIOUS BUSINESS 5ET
F777448 GDR LINDA SUE 93 POLLED
F672439 WCR MISS PERFECITON 9315

Pasted this from the Char data page..................................
 
One more little thing I have been chasing around in my head. We are told over and over that single trait selection will get us in trouble. IF a producer buys bulls, or selects females based SOLELY on weaning weights, is that not SINGLE TRAIT SELECTION?
Click to expand...

Terminal Sires are generally chosen for the single traits of growth and/or carcass merit.

Single trait selection can be less than desirable if retaining heifers for the herd. Sometimes not.
 
Faster horses said:
YUP. You'll have no argument from me, Mike. I was just repeating something I thought as interesting. BTW, it wasn't just a small group of calves...it was based on every calf that went out of W. Montana through that scale over a period of several years. But it was just a remark he made...

What is the details of the Char calf that weighed over 1000 lbs? My, my but that IS impressive.
Was that adjusted weight, was that calf raised on its own mother or was it an embroyo transplant? What was it's age in days when it was weighed?
As I say, his weight was impressive. Don't think I've ever heard of an Angus calf that weighed that much at 205 days.

One more little thing I have been chasing around in my head. We are told over and over that single trait selection will get us in trouble. IF a producer buys bulls, or selects females based SOLELY on weaning weights, is that not SINGLE TRAIT SELECTION?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

You must not get a Shaff's bull sale book they claim to have lot's that wean close to 1000 each year.Where Feed's the Breed
 
As I said from the start I know this is to small a group to rely on.

I also tried a 30 day split in groups over the winter last year and found the Angus cows were eating much less than the Cahrolis. That has been my main reason for moving to an all Angus breeding herd. I feel I can increase my numbers carried on my pastures by about 20% and as such should have more calves to sell. But my plan was to use Charolis bulls and I still think that is a good money maker.

Other than the 30 day split all the cows were run together. The calves were all together from birth till sale day.

If I had not run them across the scale I would have sworn the Smokie calves were bigger - - - They are much larger framed and I'm sure will weigh more when finished but at the the blacks went 615# average at weaning and the Smokies were 590# and I got the same amount per pound for both.

I will weigh the groups seperately this year again to see if it holds true. The Charolis cows sure look better than the Angus - - - did the Angus put more of thenselves into milk??? I don't have answers I can only report on the end result and step back and try to find the reason.
 
It could be that the Angus cows were just better milkers and that may have shown up more this year as we had more drought stress in our area.
Just a thought.
 
Cutterone

I had not thought of that and it makes a lot of sense. The Charolis cows kept their flesh even though we had very poor grass, and the Angus lost quite a bit of weight, much more than normal but they must have out it in the calves- - - - on a normal year the results might have been different.

Right after weaning I turned the cows out to clean the fields and all look good again.
 
George said:
Cutterone

I had not thought of that and it makes a lot of sense. The Charolis cows kept their flesh even though we had very poor grass, and the Angus lost quite a bit of weight, much more than normal but they must have out it in the calves- - - - on a normal year the results might have been different.

Right after weaning I turned the cows out to clean the fields and all look good again.
Click to expand...

Or on a good year they may have weighed more.Either way raise what you like black or white.

When I was down at Mike's last year his charlaios cows were in good shape and his black's looked like hell.The charlaios had bigger calves also much bigger.I don't think it's so much color as it is genetics.I don't mind a skinny cow in the fall as long as she has a big calf and is bred back,a big calf and an open cow suck's I'd rather have a calf a little lighter and the cow bred.45 days in a background pen the light calves can sure bloom.
 
George, your results aren't suprising to me. I believe the Angus breeders have made more progress in the past 10 years than any other breed. They don't get much credit for it ( except the U. S. cowherd is almost totally black now ). Iowa State University has an ongoing research project comparing straight Angus with crossbreds on multiple traits. It backs up your data. I wish I could put my hands on it. It was reported in the Angus journal several months ago. Maybe someone can find it.
Anyway you are objectively evaluating your cattle and making management decisions based on it. You will benefit from it. :wink:
 
With the drought we had this year the results might not be the norm but it will keep me checking.

I was already going away from Charolis cows as I have been checking on feed consumption ( round bales ) for the last three years and the Charolis will eat about 60% more hay than the Angus in the same amount of time so I figured I can increase my stocking rate by going black. Even if the black calves were slightly smaller I felt I would come out ahead - - - but with them coming out bigger I just can't justify keeping the Charolis ( although they sure are beautiful )

With a small herd like mine where I only need two bulls I will still use a Charolis and an Angus and see if the smokey calves still hold there own with the blacks before I quit the Charolis all together
 
I think it has to do with the genetics of your bulls .the calves and cows have the same enviorment and the only difference in genetics is the bulls. In my expierence char angus cross usally out wiegh blacks but they sure wont out sell them here. i went to a sale sat in northern missiouri for example there was a dispersal of smokies the 3 year old cows in the 3rd wieghing 1340 brought $800 a group of 3 year old black cows in the 3rd weighing 1125 brought $1080 in this area it seems blk or bwf is all they want.
 

Latest posts

Top