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

Interesting Red Angus Calf

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
My Genex manager stopped in for a couple days and we did some touring. The company bought a calf at Six Mile Red Angus on Monday for $36,000 he looks to be not half bad. Out of a nice uddered two year old and his carcass data is good. I don't have a link to their website but I'll try and find one. He'll be a bit of an outcross for most Red Angus breeders.
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
http://www.sixmileredangus.com/sales.htm

Here's the link-he's the Lot One bull. I bought my first red angus bull from these guys 20 some years ago-he wasn't quite as shiny or as expensive as this one. I do remember it was -42 when I left home to go look at him an eight hour drive lol.
 

BRG

Well-known member
Boy I like him and his dam by the photo. Any idea how small or big he is. By the photo they both put it together right, and I don't see any Cherokee Canyon in his pedigree anywhere. Looks interesting.

Also do you know if they scanned him or not, and what his scrotal measurement is?
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
His marbling score was 5.00 with 6.25mm backfat I think. his own performance and E.P.D's are posted-what more do you need-I'm sure he is amply endowed. I'm guessing that he's a frame six bull. I'm sure Clayton or Corrine will visit about him with anyone who calls.
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
If I remember right his estimated lean meat yield was 62% and a bit. His backfat was a bit over a 1/4 inch. I don't have the carcass sheet here I just glanced at it this A'M in the truck-he marbled well for the fat cover he was carrying and had a decent lean yield. If he throws daughters like his Mom he'll do just fine.
 

Turkey Track Bar

Well-known member
BRG said:
How about REA measurement? Any idea what that BF converts to, for us non metric users?

BRG:

1 inch = 25.4 millimeters

6.25 mm/ 25.4 mm/in = .25 in.

NR:

Nice calf...looks like the price was well deserved.

Cheers---

TTB :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Northern Rancher said:
If I remember right his estimated lean meat yield was 62% and a bit. His backfat was a bit over a 1/4 inch. I don't have the carcass sheet here I just glanced at it this A'M in the truck-he marbled well for the fat cover he was carrying and had a decent lean yield. If he throws daughters like his Mom he'll do just fine.

NR, Your statement that "he marbled well for the fat cover he was carrying" interests me.

Are you saying it takes lot's of fat cover to marble?

This bull's IMF to BF numbers look like the type to use for improving a herd.
*******************************************************

1. 1992 Canadian National Breeders School Handbook
2. D.E. Wilson, R.L. Willham, S.L. Northcutt, and G.E. Rouse. Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames. Genetic Parameters for Carcass Traits Estimated from Angus field Records, J. Anim. Sci. 71:2365-2370.

Genetic correlations between carcass traits can be used to compare how one trait is affected by another trait genetically (table 3). When the values are positive, the two traits increase or decrease together. This means that when one carcass trait increases, so does the other. When there is a negative correlation, one trait increases while the other trait decreases. For example, the low correlation between marbling and backfat thickness means that selection for marbling does not necessarily lead to an equivalent increase in backfat thickness. If ultrasound detects low backfat and higher marbling, these animals can be selected for breeding or marketing that way.
Table 3: Genetic Correlation Comparisons

Hot carcass wt. and ribeye area:
47%

Hot carcass wt. and fat thickness:
3%

Marbling score and fat thickness:
Very close to 0%

Ribeye area and fat thickness:
Very close to 0%
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
What I'm saying is that not many bulls will have Choice marbling at that fat cover--I just look through the ultrasound data in the sale catalogues I get and see a corrrelation-some bulls are fat as ticks and still have no marbling-to get a decent yield grade you should be reaching Choice at that fat cover. I sell on a carcass grid but to be honest carcass data is quite a ways back from soundness and fertility in my selection criteria-if those things are equal I will look at carcass stuff pretty close.
 

PPRM

Well-known member
Guys, this is a subject very near and dear to me.....Let me preface mt comments by saying I am marketing my Beef directly to my customers. Let me also say that I realize there are very many differing views on what quality Beef is. I feel like that is a good thing that keeps us able to raise in a variety of environments and practices....

My deal....Very lean, yet not fat free. I get tenderness and flavor consistently by dry aging and feeding corn I feel....My proof is only in the feedback I get. Strongest case...At least three ladies that bought my Beef last year for thier families and all come back to say, I never eat beef, by I eat yours!

So, Fat cover is a bad thing...Yet, I also sell on the grid my excess calves or anything that ever gets doctored. So Marbling is a big deal....However, I can't allow too much as I will/have gotten complaints about fat in sirloin steaks....

At this point, I feel my selection criteria/ultimate goal is based on the order of premiums.....First is a live calf at weaning...Birthwieght, udder, all that kind of stuff....Let me say I started with Salebarn cows I put together, so sometimes udder and Prolapse tendencies don't show up till a cow is 5 years old or older....

The next premium is wieght....I really want carcass wieght to be 800 pounds or greater....I feed out my calves and am beginning to believe a good plane of nutrition without pushing them is the way to get there. This is only possible with an inexpensive backgrounding ration that still sets the marbling...I have that.

If the calves go to Tyson, then it is marbling...I have black hided calves and feel between CAB and Quality grade considerations, I could get $8-10/cwt better if they graded better...That is $60-80/head premium on those calves..

So, the trick is to do this without geting too fat for my market. Part of it is feeding them to a point and then disqualifying them from my customers if I don't need calves at that point. I would feed them up...

As you can tell by my rambling, I am not all the way done on this. but I think I am gettting it figured out. In Carcass trials, my claves have a tendency to grade Low Choice. I was going to address this with some really superior marbling cattle, but have decided to try some good marbling cattle that have mnimal fat cover...We'll see how it works...

Always a good conversation I think,

PPRM
 

Turkey Track Bar

Well-known member
Northern Rancher said:
TTB put up the info on the bull that Genex bought from you-then we'll have two intertesting bulls here.

NR:

Sorry I haven't responded sooner...been away...

Here's his picture:

60-3.jpg


His pedigree and EPD's.

http://old.redangus.org/cgi-bin/extped.4ge?1100311

We appreciate Genex purchasing him and hope he sells well for them, and just as importantly, his progeny perform well for those who use him.

I think lazy ace will try and get a picture of his Mom.

Cheers---

TTB :wink:
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
Looks good-is he at Hawkeye West-I'm trying to get a little tour organized stateside to look at some cattle-if were in your neck of the woods we'll stop in. I wonder how long before he's ready to come up north.
 

DOC HARRIS

Well-known member
BRG said:
Boy I like him and his dam by the photo. Any idea how small or big he is. By the photo they both put it together right, and I don't see any Cherokee Canyon in his pedigree anywhere. Looks interesting.

Also do you know if they scanned him or not, and what his scrotal measurement is?
BRG

Not being as familiar with Red Angus pedigrees as I would care to, could you explain why you seem to be a little negative in regard to Cherokee Canyon? I see his name in a lot of Red Angus pedigrees, and am curious as to why you are opposed to him.

DOC HARRIS
 

BRG

Well-known member
Doc,

I say that for 2 reasons.

First, it seems as if every pedigree you look at anymore has him there. It is really tough to find a real good herdsire with out him right there. This calf is an outcross and for what I see he looks to be a good one to boot.

Secondly, We never used Cherokee, I didn't like him when I saw him as a young bull. Just not my type of bull.
 

Northern Rancher

Well-known member
He's bred pretty close to Major League on the topside so I guess Megan will have to use him on her other red Angus cows. He reminds me of some of the Nichols black bulls that we've used of the years the way he profiles. That's a good thing in my books for whatever that's worth.
 

DOC HARRIS

Well-known member
BRG said:
Doc,

I say that for 2 reasons.

First, it seems as if every pedigree you look at anymore has him there. It is really tough to find a real good herdsire with out him right there. This calf is an outcross and for what I see he looks to be a good one to boot.

Secondly, We never used Cherokee, I didn't like him when I saw him as a young bull. Just not my type of bull.
BRG-

Thank you! This is one way to get a "feel' for the general opinions of breeders who are in the business with a particular breed and who are closer to the facts than someone who is not intimately involved with the specific genetics.

DOC HARRIS
 
Top