Testing Changes / Ratings....

[bffarms1]

Good Morning!!!

I've read the article several times in regards to the upcoming testing and ratings changes.  I've mulled it over, read what others have wrote on the subject....and in all honesty I'm stumped.  Why would the ADCA go this route?  Maybe I am looking at it the wrong way.  We are fairly new to the breed, had our first round of calves this year.  We currently have a herd of 16, 2 bulls, 2 steers and the rest are heifers and cows.  (just to give you a little back ground info...we do have chondro carriers, and all of our cattle are traditional horned.)  

I understand that the ADCA is trying to encourage/push breeders to fully test and disclose the results.  I even agree with testing and have been working on it with our herd.  There are so many different ways they could have done this.  The rating system is ridiculous...sorry if I offended anyone but it is to me!!  And honestly I'm baffled by what to do!!

I feel that with the rating system they have put in place our cattle would be penalized.  I wonder how that will "come out in the wash" when we finally do start selling our cattle.  I wonder how this system will affect newbies looking to get into the breed?  

My question to the forum is what are the options for us as breeders? 

[Deleted]

they decided not to do it. there is a message about it on the adca home page.

[cascade]

Dec 5, 2014 16:21:44 GMT bffarms1 said:

Good Morning!!!

I've read the article several times in regards to the upcoming testing and ratings changes.  I've mulled it over, read what others have wrote on the subject....and in all honesty I'm stumped.  Why would the ADCA go this route?  Maybe I am looking at it the wrong way.  We are fairly new to the breed, had our first round of calves this year.  We currently have a herd of 16, 2 bulls, 2 steers and the rest are heifers and cows.  (just to give you a little back ground info...we do have chondro carriers, and all of our cattle are traditional horned.)  

I understand that the ADCA is trying to encourage/push breeders to fully test and disclose the results.  I even agree with testing and have been working on it with our herd.  There are so many different ways they could have done this.  The rating system is ridiculous...sorry if I offended anyone but it is to me!!  And honestly I'm baffled by what to do!!

I feel that with the rating system they have put in place our cattle would be penalized.  I wonder how that will "come out in the wash" when we finally do start selling our cattle.  I wonder how this system will affect newbies looking to get into the breed?  

My question to the forum is what are the options for us as breeders? 

From my reading, it was just a method to track the various things we know about the status of animals in the ADCA online pedigree system.

Animals are either carriers or non-carriers, but we arrive at that info in various ways and the ADCA proposed that it be tracked in the computer system

Some animals are not tested at all....  So that's one computer code
Some animals are directly tested... so that's another computer code
Some animals are not tested, but their parents/grandparents on pedigree were tested.... that's another computer code
Some animals are not tested, but their parents/grandparents were tested AND those parents are verified (another code)

That's all good information and should be tracked... but is the method the very best approach? 

In the ADCA Bulletin, the ADCA presented the plan to members and requested that those with issues and concerns contact their directors... Many folks did contact their directors.

Based on the feedback, the Directors decided to put it on hold until the AGM annual meeting... They immediately notified folks online on the website.

It sounds like the ADCA did a great job of managing this...

1. They announced the proposed change in advance and asked for feedback to the Directors
2. They listened to the feedback
3. They put the proposed change on hold for further input and consideration.

My guess is that no matter what they eventually settle on, there will be some unhappy folks... I suppose that's human nature.


 
 

[bffarms1]

Dexterfarm..thank you so much for letting me know that information.

Cascade..I agree with the ADCA in regards to testing, and someway to track the testing is needed. However, I do not think the best way to go about it is with a Tier system. I referred to it as rating, but should have referred to it as tiered system. But in my mind its a rating system, when they start referring to lowest tier and highest tier that in my mind is a rating system.

There are 4 adults and 4 children who are partnered in our farm, and I am the worrier and over thinker of the group. In both my personal life and my professional one I like to have plans in place or at least in the back of my mind so that if something happens I have at least considered my options. Sometimes this gets me in trouble and sometimes its a good thing.

I'm glad the ADCA Board has decided to postpone this decision, and I agree with you that not everyone will be happy, and you cannot make everyone happy. But as is my lot in life I now have to worry about the ramifications if this does get approved. I have to consider options, because ultimately I could be one of those unhappy with the decision.

[wvdexters]

bff, I don't agree that you over-worried or over-thought this one. Believe me, you weren't the only one that was upset about it. And this was across the board. As for the tier system, I totally agree. I do not care for it either, it is essentially a rating system, and will be used as one if ever implemented.

Why do we have to make everything so difficult? KISS Keep It Simple Stupid. Words to live by.

Chondro and PHA - the animal either carries it or it does not.

There are only three possibilities for any given Dexter: positive, negative or unknown

Positive - self explanatory
Negative- self explanatory
Unknown - Either untested or tested but unreported.

The differing obligate ratings are meaningless and unnecessary. Obligate Status always requires full parentage verification. Anything less is simply a presumption and has no place here.

A fully Parentage Verified Dexter has been tested. Obligate Status should be rewarded as is appropriate to the situation.
example- if animal is obligate negative for PHA - his listing is simply Negative. There is no need to designate obligate.

Why make things too complicated

[cascade]

Dec 6, 2014 2:27:44 GMT wvdexters said:

bff, I don't agree that you over-worried or over-thought this one. Believe me, you weren't the only one that was upset about it. And this was across the board. As for the tier system, I totally agree. I do not care for it either, it is essentially a rating system, and will be used as one if ever implemented.

Why do we have to make everything so difficult? KISS Keep It Simple Stupid. Words to live by.

Chondro and PHA - the animal either carries it or it does not.

There are only three possibilities for any given Dexter: positive, negative or unknown

Positive - self explanatory
Negative- self explanatory
Unknown - Either untested or tested but unreported.

The differing obligate ratings are meaningless and unnecessary. Obligate Status always requires full parentage verification. Anything less is simply a presumption and has no place here.

A fully Parentage Verified Dexter has been tested. Obligate Status should be rewarded as is appropriate to the situation.
example- if animal is obligate negative for PHA - his listing is simply Negative. There is no need to designate obligate.

Why make things too complicated

I agree that the listing should simply say "Negative" or "Positive"

But it's probably smart to also separately track HOW the negative result was arrived at.
Parentage verifications are only 99% accurate, they're NOT 100% accurate
In a mixed herd of chondro and non-chondro, obligate status should ALWAYS require require parentage verification
In a CLOSED herd of non-chondros (All originally tested as non-chondro) obligate status should not necessarily need parentage verification (but I'm not opposed to parentage verification for other reasons).

We should store HOW a "negative" status was arrived at in case something pops up in the future..
It's smart to have the system tell us which animals were actually tested vs. those which are obligate, especially in mixed chondro-herds since parentage verification is not 100% accurate.  Obligate negatives coming from mixed chondro herds COULD potentially carry chondro since the parentage verifications aren't 100% accurate.

If I was buying a non-chondro animal from a mixed chondro herd, I wouldn't trust an obligate negative status 100%.   I'd only trust it 99%.  99% is good enough for many things, but not good enough to avoid chondro.