What makes a good maternal bull?

[Dylan Biggs]

Good photos OT Thank you. To my eye those photos do a good job of demonstrating a tremendous variety in phenotype. From the old Rito N Bar bull who almost looks double muscled to the Candolier Forever bull who has virtually no secondary masculine character. No crest, muscle definition or expression. Just over all a really flat plain looking bull. As regards, the buffalo type herd bull you referred did any of the photos you posted qualify?

 

[Anonymous]

Heres another old bull thats had a lot of influence on several maternal herds over the past 25 years- Shoshone Encore 6310 (which just happens to have Favour of Wye and Shoshone Viking GD60 3 generations back in his family tree)....

Dylan of all the bulls- to me some of the ones that have the most "buffalo" look- big muscled neck and shoulders- with smaller/lighter rear end- is the emulation bulls...Emulation 31- 5522...Even EXT to an extent...

We had a 5522 son for a bull- and the kids called him Bully Wooly because he had an almost buffalo look- curley hair on his head and neck...Great bull- raised good calves- sired good quiet cows- and was so quiet he'd come up to the fence to get his head scratched...

 

[Faster horses]

Here's what Horse Butte Ranch had to say about Shoshone Encore 6310:

Born in 1985, "Encore" has been utilized heavily in the Horse Butte herd. He adds longevity; he bred his last cows as a 12 yr. old, his dam produced her last calf at 17 yrs of age. His structure was impeccable. He had a gentle disposition and throws gentle dispositions. He improves teat and udder attachment and produces excellent marbling and ribeye. His progeny excel on forage, shed off well and he has proven to be a bull that works well on all types of forage from the southern fescues to the northern hard grasses. We value his ability to contribute true foundation genetics in a package that fits our management practices. Owned by Shoshone Angus, Keeney Angus, and Barry Cooper. Deceased

 

[Grassfarmer]

Good photos OT Thank you. To my eye those photos do a good job of demonstrating a tremendous variety in phenotype. From the old Rito N Bar bull who almost looks double muscled to the Candolier Forever bull who has virtually no secondary masculine character. No crest, muscle definition or expression. Just over all a really flat plain looking bull. As regards, the buffalo type herd bull you referred did any of the photos you posted qualify?

I agree Dylan, there look to be all sorts in there. The bull you highlighted (Candolier Forever) as being plain is actually the very type of bull I had in mind when I started this post. He looks to be younger in the picture than any of the others and as such I think he has adequate muscle. I wouldn't hesitate to use that phenotype if I knew he was off a strong maternal line. That's the shape that we have had good success with looking back at the best heifer breeders.
On the other hand some of the bulls at the bottom are the very type I don't like - limo conformation, double muscled hind ends - too fancy, too terminal in my mind. The Emulation 31 bull is the closest to being a buffalo of the group OT posted in my view.
I think we are talking about two different things though - I definitely believe the buffalo theory of very masculine bulls with big necks and shoulders that breed good females but there is also the type that are not overly masculine, not huge shouldered, not big rumped and the Candolier Forever is a fairly good example of that.
I should say my experiences have not been with Angus bulls but I've seen it with White Shorthorns, Galloways, Luings and once with a Simmental.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Good photos OT Thank you. To my eye those photos do a good job of demonstrating a tremendous variety in phenotype. From the old Rito N Bar bull who almost looks double muscled to the Candolier Forever bull who has virtually no secondary masculine character. No crest, muscle definition or expression. Just over all a really flat plain looking bull. As regards, the buffalo type herd bull you referred did any of the photos you posted qualify?

I agree Dylan, there look to be all sorts in there. The bull you highlighted (Candolier Forever) as being plain is actually the very type of bull I had in mind when I started this post. He looks to be younger in the picture than any of the others and as such I think he has adequate muscle. I wouldn't hesitate to use that phenotype if I knew he was off a strong maternal line. That's the shape that we have had good success with looking back at the best heifer breeders.
On the other hand some of the bulls at the bottom are the very type I don't like - limo conformation, double muscled hind ends - too fancy, too terminal in my mind. The Emulation 31 bull is the closest to being a buffalo of the group OT posted in my view.
I think we are talking about two different things though - I definitely believe the buffalo theory of very masculine bulls with big necks and shoulders that breed good females but there is also the type that are not overly masculine, not huge shouldered, not big rumped and the Candolier Forever is a fairly good example of that.
I should say my experiences have not been with Angus bulls but I've seen it with White Shorthorns, Galloways, Luings and once with a Simmental.

Grassfarmer I agree comparing bulls from photos of different age, condition, season, after or before breeding season and different management in alot of cases can be like comparing Apples to Oranges. Even the way a bull is standing, or the height where he is holding his head can really change his looks. So I wouldn,t want to pass final judgment from one photo on a computer screen. My preference though would be toward the Viking bull and away from the extremes of the spectrum. The Candolier bull to me in that photo just doesn't look enough like a bull to make me want to use him. Like a replacement heifer though it is just a guess until you have daughters in production from him. That is why if I were to use a bull AI I would prefer a bull with daughters in production that have weaned at least two calves.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

OT thank you for the photo. I don't know what age the encore bull was in the photo but I would guess at least 9. Very complete looking bull to my eye. And my guess would be that the photo was taken not to long after breeding? He looks like he is bellowing in that photo, nose stuck out and head level with his top which flattens out his crest. All things considered a bull I would take a chance on.

 

[Faster horses]

The thing about Candolier Forever 376 is that he IS a proven
cow maker, so you don't need to guess about him. The cows tend
to be a bit on the hard doing side, whatever that's worth.
It would be interesting to correlate that to something we can
see in the bull. But is that possible?

 

[Northern Rancher]

Cowmakers shouldn't throw hard doing cows FH.

 

[Faster horses]

I agree, but if they are harder-doing (notice I said a bit harder doing)
in some areas, maybe they aren't in other areas where feed is more
abundant. Even if they are harder-doing (which isn't a desireable
trait to me) but they have good udders, breed back on time, have
great daughters, what does it matter that they are harder fleshing.
It's what they can do in the rig they have, isn't it? Maybe he is
touted as a cowmaker because some of the easier fleshing cattle
don't milk as well, breed back as well, etc.
I'm throwing this out there for discussion...because this thread
has me rethinking some things. I sure don't like seeing hard-doing
cattle, and have not selected for them; but our cowherd was originally based on Rito bloodlines. Those cows, now that I think about it, might
not have been quite as easy fleshing in this country, but in W. Montana they were fine. The calves showed explosive
growth and the females did a super job for us. The only reason Rito
kind of faded away in our herd was because they were getting harder
to find. Some cattle with Rito in their name, really weren't Rito cattle.
Now Rito 6I6 is a good modern bull, to my way of thinking. He's easy
fleshing too, but I have heard some things about his feet that wasn't
so good.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

The thing about Candolier Forever 376 is that he IS a proven
cow maker, so you don't need to guess about him. The cows tend
to be a bit on the hard doing side, whatever that's worth.
It would be interesting to correlate that to something we can
see in the bull. But is that possible?

Good point. I guess my personal preferences are showing. A "bit" on the hard doing side is probably acceptable as long as they re-breed consistently, which I have seen some cows do. Not the prettiest picture but beauty is as beauty does. Still I don't think a person has to sacrifice one trait for the other. There are enough cattle out there that have the ability to offer both so you can have your cake and eat it to when it comes to fertility and fleshing ease.

 

[Anonymous]

No personal experience on Candolier Forever 376-- but some oldtimers I talked to have spoke highly on him as a comaker-- and if you look in the pedigrees of a lot of the "more maternal angus"- he is there a few generations back..

 

[Grassfarmer]

The thing about Candolier Forever 376 is that he IS a proven
cow maker, so you don't need to guess about him. The cows tend
to be a bit on the hard doing side, whatever that's worth.
It would be interesting to correlate that to something we can
see in the bull. But is that possible?

Good point. I guess my personal preferences are showing. A "bit" on the hard doing side is probably acceptable as long as they re-breed consistently, which I have seen some cows do. Not the prettiest picture but beauty is as beauty does. Still I don't think a person has to sacrifice one trait for the other. There are enough cattle out there that have the ability to offer both so you can have your cake and eat it to when it comes to fertility and fleshing ease.

I'm not disagreeing with you Dylan, fertility and fleshing ease can go hand in hand but the balance is sometimes hard to get right. Taken to the extreme I believe these can be quite antagonistic traits.
Your comment that I highlighted, taken out of context admittedly, in my opinion is what is wrong with mainstream cattle breeding today. Lots of guys promoting bulls/cows that can do it all and suffer no consequence. Just look at the Rito bull's advert that OT posted "Muscle, Explosive Growth, Fertility, Carcase Quality, Appetite, Efficiency" And so begins the elusive search for the curve benders that can do it all. Lets throw some EPDs in there to help speed the selection process - after all the ones with bigger numbers must be bigger, faster, better eh?
In my mind this is pure and unadulterated BS that just doesn't hold up in the real world. I grew up among cattle that were considered as maternal breeds - we used terminal sires to outcross some. There was no assumption that our steers from the maternal program would rival the terminal sired ones on terminal/carcase traits. Yet that has become the industry norm, the industry expectation here - I think it's an exercise in deceit paid for by the commercial cattleman in higher cow maintenance costs and reduced profitability.

 

[Anonymous]

The thing about Candolier Forever 376 is that he IS a proven
cow maker, so you don't need to guess about him. The cows tend
to be a bit on the hard doing side, whatever that's worth.
It would be interesting to correlate that to something we can
see in the bull. But is that possible?

Good point. I guess my personal preferences are showing. A "bit" on the hard doing side is probably acceptable as long as they re-breed consistently, which I have seen some cows do. Not the prettiest picture but beauty is as beauty does. Still I don't think a person has to sacrifice one trait for the other. There are enough cattle out there that have the ability to offer both so you can have your cake and eat it to when it comes to fertility and fleshing ease.

I'm not disagreeing with you Dylan, fertility and fleshing ease can go hand in hand but the balance is sometimes hard to get right. Taken to the extreme I believe these can be quite antagonistic traits.
Your comment that I highlighted, taken out of context admittedly, in my opinion is what is wrong with mainstream cattle breeding today. Lots of guys promoting bulls/cows that can do it all and suffer no consequence. Just look at the Rito bull's advert that OT posted "Muscle, Explosive Growth, Fertility, Carcase Quality, Appetite, Efficiency" And so begins the elusive search for the curve benders that can do it all. Lets throw some EPDs in there to help speed the selection process - after all the ones with bigger numbers must be bigger, faster, better eh?
In my mind this is pure and unadulterated BS that just doesn't hold up in the real world. I grew up among cattle that were considered as maternal breeds - we used terminal sires to outcross some. There was no assumption that our steers from the maternal program would rival the terminal sired ones on terminal/carcase traits. Yet that has become the industry norm, the industry expectation here - I think it's an exercise in deceit paid for by the commercial cattleman in higher cow maintenance costs and reduced profitability.

Taken to the extreme

Right there are the magic words that makes the difference in raising good cattle or screwing up good cattle imho....

 

[Grassfarmer]

Taken to the extreme
Right there are the magic words that makes the difference in raising good cattle or screwing up good cattle imho....

Looking back to the pictures you posted OT surely you would consider those to Rito bulls to be extreme? I'm still interested to know if you posted them to agree or disagree with the thinking of the posters that liked buffalo fronted bulls with a lighter hind end. To me those are some of the most extreme, heavy back ended Angus I've ever seen pictured and would have guessed them extremely terminal types.
The EXT bull just looks weird in that picture, too many lumps and bumps all catching the light.
I remember in the 80's one of the earliest Canadian Angus bulls in Scotland broke badly behind the shoulder. If you saw him in person then looked at the semen catalog you could see the photo had been doctored - with a marker pen to make his top line level :shock: :shock:
Ah, reflections on a simpler time pre-photoshop :lol: :lol:

 

[Faster horses]

GF, your post reminded me of something.
Back in 1974 we were breeding straightbred herefords and using
sons of a popular bull. We got the big Annual Western Livestock
Reporter magazine--it was huge back then. The popular sire of the
bulls we were using was in there. The binding wasn't real good
and wasn't helped by the weight of the magazine. A page fell
out and it happened to be one that the bull was on. The center crease
was in the middle of the bull. When I picked the page up, the
bulls navel was on that page. When I put it back together,
the bulls navel was on the other page as well!!!!! :shock: It
was a nice try to make that bull look much longer than he really was.
It was kind of funny, seeing a bull with two navels!! I'd have never known, had the page not fallen out.

Those cattle weren't good anyway...no milk... :shock:

 

[Anonymous]

Taken to the extreme
Right there are the magic words that makes the difference in raising good cattle or screwing up good cattle imho....

Looking back to the pictures you posted OT surely you would consider those to Rito bulls to be extreme? I'm still interested to know if you posted them to agree or disagree with the thinking of the posters that liked buffalo fronted bulls with a lighter hind end. To me those are some of the most extreme, heavy back ended Angus I've ever seen pictured and would have guessed them extremely terminal types.
The EXT bull just looks weird in that picture, too many lumps and bumps all catching the light.
I remember in the 80's one of the earliest Canadian Angus bulls in Scotland broke badly behind the shoulder. If you saw him in person then looked at the semen catalog you could see the photo had been doctored - with a marker pen to make his top line level :shock: :shock:
Ah, reflections on a simpler time pre-photoshop :lol: :lol:

Actually the reason I put up Rito N Bar and 707 was because that was the only way I could load the emulation pictures :wink: :lol:
And you are right- the Rito's had good muscle- and may have been one of the reasons they were so popular back in the 70's...Some I've talked to said old 707 sired some pretty good cows tho- and is in the pedigree of many of the more maternal bulls today...

But that said- I do have a 4 frame bull I'm using now that is a Grandson of 707 and traces back 16 times to him-- 4 times to Viking and a couple times to Emulation 31 on the bottom.. He sires easy calving quiet calves- that do have some muscle- while reducing frame size ...And talk about a bull with libido- during breeding season he's on the move always (which I've been told was a trait of the Rito 707's) ...
Ask me in about 10 years if he worked as a comaker... :wink:


The other bull I'm running with the registered cows is a Bannon of Wye son... The old Bannon bull is starting to prove out as a cow-maker- and with 602C as mgs this bull has the potential to too...The old Bannon bull was a 4 frame- and the son I have is a 5 frame- picking up some size from 602C..

Bannon of Wye UMF 8420

Taken to the extreme

And again I think that is the main thing- a balancing act to keep moderation in all traits....You can't throw out the baby with the bathwater- and I think you can still maintain good growth without sacrificing all the maternal...

 

[Dylan Biggs]

OT good looking practical type bull.

 

[WB]

Thanks for the pictures OT. I think that it shows some differences for sure. I will side with NR on this one in that I still want some muscle in a maternal sire. After all I don't need to raise milk cows. The example of Candolier forever 376 is a good one as I don't need cows that are of that type. I will continue to select away from his type as they require too much feed to maintain flesh.

 

[Faster horses]

Cattle don't have to be frail, or hard-doing, high milking cows to be
maternal. In fact, I recently read where high milk is not necessarily
a maternal trait. Bad bags from too much milk doesn't show
good maternal characteristics in my book.

Now I need to find that article so I can copy/paste it here.
It surprised me at first, but after I read the article, I understood
better. Hope I have that still around here somewhere.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the pictures OT. I think that it shows some differences for sure. I will side with NR on this one in that I still want some muscle in a maternal sire. After all I don't need to raise milk cows. The example of Candolier forever 376 is a good one as I don't need cows that are of that type. I will continue to select away from his type as they require too much feed to maintain flesh.

WB- I agree with you...Thats the reason I think you have to do that "balancing act" on traits....

On the 5barX site where we are having this same argument- someone showed two different cows-labeling them the lighter muscled/built "maternal" that they claim has more longevity (?) and the heavier muscled/built "efficient" cow....My goal is one right in the middle :wink:

Personally I think the more capacity- deeper- thicker cows- with a little fat on their backs do better up here in this country where we can have winter 7-8 months of the year...One of the problems with longevity in short grass country is teeth...Lot of broken mouth cows around that are still quite young...Maybe we should be looking for bulls with cast iron teeth/mouths... :wink: