Post by Glenn on Apr 18, 2014 8:19:31 GMT -6
Here is an Angus breeder that provides a refreshing view on EPDs.
>>EPD's started out with (theoretically) a noble purpose. A way to HELP cattlemen make genetic choices by putting a number value on important (economic) traits. The logical beneficiary was the commercial cattleman who could use them as a tool when they needed to purchase genetics, largely once a year when they needed to buy bulls. So far, so good.
What EPD's and their shirt tail relative $values have evolved into is often far less noble. Perhaps nothing highlights that evolution more distinctly than the tale of 1680. As Robert has occasionally pointed out, 1680 was a narrow, hard doing, no nutted, POC bull. Here his progeny were so bad they were embarrassing. However because his progeny scanned well and with the new emphasis on carcass EPD's and $values connected to carcass traits, he quickly became the darling of the registered business. The rest is history. What EPD's have often evolved into is a marketing tool (scam?) for registered breeders to point to as a reason their cattle have (often imagined) superiority.
Most people have a pretty straightforward relationship with numbers. A bigger number in your bank account for instance is better. However like a few others I began to question what I was seeing in my cows as the EPD race accelerated. Namely to keep up required more and more inputs. One day I used the AAA optimum milk module to calculate what kind of milk numbers I should have if I was completely honest about the availability and price of forage in this area. What I found was what I already instinctively knew. There was virtually no popular bull in a stud that could take me in the right direction. For a number of traits I had already passed the optimum. If that was true for me, what about the people I sold bulls to? There is a great deal more to the EPD story than pointing to the numbers as a reason to justify why one animal is worth more. Whatever good EPD's had started from was morphing into something else... namely a way to manipulate and often deceive commercial cattlemen into believing something that often wasn't true. After all how could one question the validity of a number with a $ in front of it? Even if that number with a $ in front of it had very little actual value on their profitability compared to other things.
For those truly interested in profitability in beef cow operations there are some cold hard facts. These things have been pointed out in SPA data from numerous places around the country. Despite ever accelerated WW EPD's in the extremely dominant breed actual weaning weights have been flat in commercial cow herds for quite awhile. At the same time mature cow size for registered cows has continued to climb. It is not unreasonable to also assume that those genetics have often increased the cow size in commercial operations. Even if WW 's were to have increased they are no true indication of profitability. Instead profitability depends on a number of interrelated factors. Generally harvested feed and depreciation are at the top of the list when it comes to expenses in commercial cow operations. Change those things and you can impact the bottom line. How do increased mature cow size and increased milk production match up with increased grazing of low quality forage? Often poorly. Is any of this the direct fault of EPD's? Of course not. But making them the Holy Grail has often been counter productive.
What happens when a heifer with increased potential for both growth and milk production is mated to a bull with the same traits? You have a young cow struggling to reach her genetic potential trying to raise a calf struggling to reach their genetic potential. Yet this is very common in the paint by numbers philosophy. More is always better. To support the EPD addiction management is continually altered. Creep feeders and early weaning common place. Failing to do so would likely mean an extremely high dropout rate (which is what I experienced). How reflective is that of the realities of the commercial cow/calf business where the only reason to own a cow is her ability to turn forage into protein and do it for a number of years before she is replaced? Not at all.
In all honesty when was the last time anyone saw an ad in a sale or stud catalog that actually touted anything other than breed leading EPD's or $values? How many commercial cattlemen actually have a concept of how these numbers are interrelated, not only to each other but to the realities of their operation? And perhaps that is the actual point. By making a numbers cocktail into some sort of voodoo, cognitive dissonance makes people grasp for the familiar. More is always better.
There have been a lot of very good AAA reps. Making them into ad salesman has been a total waste of their talent and abilities.<<
>>EPD's started out with (theoretically) a noble purpose. A way to HELP cattlemen make genetic choices by putting a number value on important (economic) traits. The logical beneficiary was the commercial cattleman who could use them as a tool when they needed to purchase genetics, largely once a year when they needed to buy bulls. So far, so good.
What EPD's and their shirt tail relative $values have evolved into is often far less noble. Perhaps nothing highlights that evolution more distinctly than the tale of 1680. As Robert has occasionally pointed out, 1680 was a narrow, hard doing, no nutted, POC bull. Here his progeny were so bad they were embarrassing. However because his progeny scanned well and with the new emphasis on carcass EPD's and $values connected to carcass traits, he quickly became the darling of the registered business. The rest is history. What EPD's have often evolved into is a marketing tool (scam?) for registered breeders to point to as a reason their cattle have (often imagined) superiority.
Most people have a pretty straightforward relationship with numbers. A bigger number in your bank account for instance is better. However like a few others I began to question what I was seeing in my cows as the EPD race accelerated. Namely to keep up required more and more inputs. One day I used the AAA optimum milk module to calculate what kind of milk numbers I should have if I was completely honest about the availability and price of forage in this area. What I found was what I already instinctively knew. There was virtually no popular bull in a stud that could take me in the right direction. For a number of traits I had already passed the optimum. If that was true for me, what about the people I sold bulls to? There is a great deal more to the EPD story than pointing to the numbers as a reason to justify why one animal is worth more. Whatever good EPD's had started from was morphing into something else... namely a way to manipulate and often deceive commercial cattlemen into believing something that often wasn't true. After all how could one question the validity of a number with a $ in front of it? Even if that number with a $ in front of it had very little actual value on their profitability compared to other things.
For those truly interested in profitability in beef cow operations there are some cold hard facts. These things have been pointed out in SPA data from numerous places around the country. Despite ever accelerated WW EPD's in the extremely dominant breed actual weaning weights have been flat in commercial cow herds for quite awhile. At the same time mature cow size for registered cows has continued to climb. It is not unreasonable to also assume that those genetics have often increased the cow size in commercial operations. Even if WW 's were to have increased they are no true indication of profitability. Instead profitability depends on a number of interrelated factors. Generally harvested feed and depreciation are at the top of the list when it comes to expenses in commercial cow operations. Change those things and you can impact the bottom line. How do increased mature cow size and increased milk production match up with increased grazing of low quality forage? Often poorly. Is any of this the direct fault of EPD's? Of course not. But making them the Holy Grail has often been counter productive.
What happens when a heifer with increased potential for both growth and milk production is mated to a bull with the same traits? You have a young cow struggling to reach her genetic potential trying to raise a calf struggling to reach their genetic potential. Yet this is very common in the paint by numbers philosophy. More is always better. To support the EPD addiction management is continually altered. Creep feeders and early weaning common place. Failing to do so would likely mean an extremely high dropout rate (which is what I experienced). How reflective is that of the realities of the commercial cow/calf business where the only reason to own a cow is her ability to turn forage into protein and do it for a number of years before she is replaced? Not at all.
In all honesty when was the last time anyone saw an ad in a sale or stud catalog that actually touted anything other than breed leading EPD's or $values? How many commercial cattlemen actually have a concept of how these numbers are interrelated, not only to each other but to the realities of their operation? And perhaps that is the actual point. By making a numbers cocktail into some sort of voodoo, cognitive dissonance makes people grasp for the familiar. More is always better.
There have been a lot of very good AAA reps. Making them into ad salesman has been a total waste of their talent and abilities.<<