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

How much is enough?

Big Swede

Well-known member
Ten years ago I was convinced that my cow herd needed more milk. I would estimate that at the time the cows were at about 10-12 pounds on their EPD's if I had to make a guess. Now I would guess them at 20-22 pounds. I am now concerned that may be too much. My pregnancy rate hasn't declined any so maybe I don't have anything to worry about but I still have a hunch that 20 plus is too much. I rarely cull for udder or teat problems like I used to so maybe if they are sound in that respect they can handle more.

Any thoughts?
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
if they milk too much for grass and you aren't supplementing them to compensate, they will cull themselves.

if you're breedback rates aren't suffering, and you're not having to supplement them, what's the problem??
you have cows that are doing their job on what you're ranch provides.

it's the fat cows with little calves, or the thin cows with big calves, that don't breed back that are the problem.

You're headed in the right direction,
cull ruthlessly to get and stay there!!!!
 

Big Swede

Well-known member
I was visiting with a friend the other night and he was telling me about an Angus sire he used AI. Something like BW4 WW70 YW125 Milk37 for EPD's. With growth traits like that it sounded like a recipe for disaster to me. At what point will the seedstock producer pull in the reins or is the sky the limit?
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
I truly feel there is too much milk in the Angus as evidenced by the current EPD's.

When the milk goes up in your cows, so does the nutrition requirements.
Sounds like you must be meeting the nutrition requirements of your cows and as long as that is fairly easy to do, I wouldn't change it. But I also would watch the milk EPD's of the next bulls I buy. I wouldn't stack that milk or you will eventually run into problems.

I really believe the milk EPDS in Angus need watching, but I'm not familiar with other breeds.
 

lazy ace

Well-known member
Big Swede said:
I was visiting with a friend the other night and he was telling me about an Angus sire he used AI. Something like BW4 WW70 YW125 Milk37 for EPD's. With growth traits like that it sounded like a recipe for disaster to me. At what point will the seedstock producer pull in the reins or is the sky the limit?

One thing you will have to remember not everybody is looking for the same bull to use. Why did your friend use the bull? In my opinion the bull has too much milk but if you had the right type of cow it might work well. If you are looking for herd bulls look at the individual, half sibs, dam other progeny and then finally look at the numbers. If you want to breed strictly on numbers you will end up disappointed and I am quite sure mother nature didn't rely soly on numbers. :wink: :wink:

We felt we offered some balanced growth and milk bulls at our sale but we also heard they didn't have enough growth or milk and weren't the top sellers. :?

have a cold one

lazy ace
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Big Swede said:
At what point will the seedstock producer pull in the reins or is the sky the limit?
When the commercial producer quits buying the outrageous EPD bulls!
Like lazy ace said, "...we also heard they didn't have enough growth or milk and weren't the top sellers."

I'm not a fan of EPDs and here is why...
The average of 70 and 80 is 75.
The average of 50 and 100 is 75.
Unless you know the bell curve of the data, you don't know what 75 means. If these numbers were actual birth weights, which of these two bulls would you use?

Buy the breeding program, not the numbers.
 

WyomingRancher

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
Big Swede said:
At what point will the seedstock producer pull in the reins or is the sky the limit?
When the commercial producer quits buying the outrageous EPD bulls!
Like lazy ace said, "...we also heard they didn't have enough growth or milk and weren't the top sellers."

I'm not a fan of EPDs and here is why...
The average of 70 and 80 is 75.
The average of 50 and 100 is 75.
Unless you know the bell curve of the data, you don't know what 75 means. If these numbers were actual birth weights, which of these two bulls would you use?

Buy the breeding program, not the numbers.

:agree: :tiphat:
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
Amen to doing your homework on breeders and their programs. Remember that they really want to sell bull at the end of the day. And a great program will be worth a lot more than a great salesman! I think that if yoy YW EPDs get to dang high and you keep replacement hiefers, your frame scores will increase and so will your feed bill. But everybody looks at EPDs and cattle and pretty much everything a little (or a lot) differently. Thats why some of us run Angus or Limos or Simmetals ect... I went to a bull test sale last weekend and saw 8 different breed represented. Some guys were after gain, some calving ease, some wanted a cheap price. All the bulls sold though. Guess everyone was happy cept me cause i wanted better bulls than my budget. I'll have to buy one next spring when they are higher priced. :lol:
 

efb

Well-known member
Robert Mac wrote
I'm not a fan of EPDs and here is why...
The average of 70 and 80 is 75.
The average of 50 and 100 is 75.
Unless you know the bell curve of the data, you don't know what 75 means. If these numbers were actual birth weights, which of these two bulls would you use?

That's why they have probability scores with the EPD's. An EPD of 75 and a probablity of .23 you might get that much variation. But if you select bulls with 90% probablity you shouldn't get much variation.
IN regards to milk, I was always told you match it to your environment. A rancher in the high desert of Nevada needs a totally different cow than I do here in NE Texas.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
You must trust the producer you buy from to know if EPD's are accurate. (not talking AI here, talking buying bulls from a breeder).
A number is just that...a number. But a person you know whose word to be good...that's something else again.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
efb said:
Robert Mac wrote
I'm not a fan of EPDs and here is why...
The average of 70 and 80 is 75.
The average of 50 and 100 is 75.
Unless you know the bell curve of the data, you don't know what 75 means. If these numbers were actual birth weights, which of these two bulls would you use?

That's why they have probability scores with the EPD's. An EPD of 75 and a probablity of .23 you might get that much variation. But if you select bulls with 90% probablity you shouldn't get much variation.
IN regards to milk, I was always told you match it to your environment. A rancher in the high desert of Nevada needs a totally different cow than I do here in NE Texas.
A bulls predictability has nothing to do with the variation within his calf crop. Genetic predictability isn't available in an EPD.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
efb said:
Robert Mac wrote
I'm not a fan of EPDs and here is why...
The average of 70 and 80 is 75.
The average of 50 and 100 is 75.
Unless you know the bell curve of the data, you don't know what 75 means. If these numbers were actual birth weights, which of these two bulls would you use?

That's why they have probability scores with the EPD's. An EPD of 75 and a probablity of .23 you might get that much variation. But if you select bulls with 90% probablity you shouldn't get much variation.
IN regards to milk, I was always told you match it to your environment. A rancher in the high desert of Nevada needs a totally different cow than I do here in NE Texas.
A bulls predictability has nothing to do with the variation within his calf crop. Genetic predictability isn't available in an EPD.
Thanks, RR
 

efb

Well-known member
I should have used the term accuracy instead of probability.

" Accuracy is the reliability that can be placed on the EPD. An accuracy of close to 1.0 indicates higher reliability. "
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
efb said:
I should have used the term accuracy instead of probability.

" Accuracy is the reliability that can be placed on the EPD. An accuracy of close to 1.0 indicates higher reliability. "
EFB the accuracy of any particular epd only indicates how likely a certain bull will have an expected progeny difference compared to another bull on average and has no bearing on the variance in his calf crop. Robertmac had it right. Bulls that have been line bred with the genetic possibilities narrowed down by removing certain amounts of genetic information through selection will be more predictable in respect to the possible genetic variability. Hmmmm that sounds confusing. I wish I had a larger vocabulary and could explain my thoughts better. :oops:
 

Doug Thorson

Well-known member
The accuracy figure doesn't measure the variation you get to get the average. Lets use a figure of 85 pounds on the birthweight to be a +3.

We have 2 bulls that have a +3 BW epd. Both get used and proven to be accurate to .65. THe difference is one was the mating of a +6 to a +0. The other was the mating of a +3 to a +3. The first bull has calves that average the +3 but their BW is anywhere from 70 to 100. The second bull also averages +3 but his calves average from 80 to 90. Nothing on his epd's are going to tell you which bull you are buying.
 

Turkey Track Bar

Well-known member
Guys...here's a good layman's explanation of "accuracy" of EPDs....


What is meant by accuracy?
The accuracy value reflects the amount and relevance of the information used to calculate an individual EPD. Accuracy values range from zero (very poor) to one (extremely accurate). Accuracy measures the reliability of an EPD or the degree of risk associated with using a particular animal on the basis of its EPD. Highly accurate EPDs are very reliable; there is little risk that the progeny performance of an individual with high accuracy values will, on average, be much different than the EPDs indicated. On the other hand, the average progeny performance of an individual with low accuracy values may be quite different from what his EPDs suggest. A common misconception is that accuracy values tell us how variable an individual’s offspring will be. They don’t. Accuracies simply tell us whether the estimate is based on good hard data or whether it is little more than a guess. (Back to the top)

What is good accuracy?
The answer varies according to each person’s feelings about risk. Here is my breakdown:

Low: less than .40‑unreliable, but still a best guess

Low/medium: .40 to .60 – worth looking at but risky

High/medium: .60 to .80 – quite trustworthy, make comparisons with some confidence

High: greater than .80 – good accuracy, compare with confidence
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Good find there TTB. I'm anxiously awaiting an explanation of location of data collection and it's bearing on accuracy. For example 878 is a .99 accuracy I assume but I would imagine that 90% if his data collection is somewhere other than fescue country. His data is accurate when going back to hard grass but I doubt that it's accurate here or at least not as highly accurate.
 

Denny

Well-known member
How much is too much?

That changes at every address each operation is different as are their need's.You just need to offer something that will work for each operation variety is essential.I have alot of low epd milk genetics and my last bull purchase has quite a bit add the two together and the offspring should be in the mid teens for milk.

Around here everyone is production driven so in order to sell them bulls you had better offer them some production.The mindset of profit is hard for most to grasp profit to them is pounds at weaning.

I raise what I like and if someone else like's the results I'm happy if they don't like them I'm still happy.For every person who like's your genetic's there is one who does'nt.

I know what I want in a cow hopefully someone else like's them also..
 
Top