|
|
Post by jamshundred on Jan 14, 2015 16:23:53 GMT
OK. I admit it. I get really put off and tired of hearing, " Saltaire Platinum" was admitted under the rules and regulations of the time". Poppycock. He was admitted by threat of lawsuit and ADCA was always scared to death to stand up against anyone for what was right. Do many of you know that Canada DID stand up. Well, maybe the ADCA lack of guts was right in the long run because I was told it cost Canada over $100,00 in legal fees. . .. . and nearly destroyed their association. ( Any Canadian who finds error in what I was told is welcome to correct the record here).
I bear no animus towards polled breeders. They are stuck in the middle of this through NO fault of their own. My bottom line never wavers though. .. . Dexter cattle are a dwarf horned and heritage breed. At the time of the polled import only 6500 animals had ever been born and registered in the US herd book which included some English and Canadian animals. Such a small number tragedy was inevitable. The genetics of this social engineering were dominant . . . . the outcome is written in the DNA. So those of us who admire this breed are downright disgusted with the lies and manuevering that took place. To have a wonderful little breed destroyed this way is just wrong in the annuals of time.
There seemed to be considerable secrecy within the leadership of this breed. ( SO . . .what else is new?). I was told a story about the vote for polled. . . . and that one Director of the time related to a later Director that a dropped pencil determined the outcome. I've believed that, ( though it seemed rather unbelievable) for a while now. Then yesterday, someone called me to ask if I had copies of the Bulletins from 1993/94 which related to the acceptance of polled. I told the person they were on the ADCA website. I was told no. . . . the pertinent one which should have the minutes was not. ( I have not followed through to see if that is correct). During the conversation there was mention of the circumstances and the reason for seeking the minutes and it related to the following information posted on Sandi Thomas' website.
I gotta say. . . I had NOT heard this before. My blood pressure is soaring! It is just more of the same old negligence and lack of professionalism that dogs this breed! Good ol' boys doing whatever they darn please and the breed and membership left out of the loop!
Do you folks realize what was perpetrated on this little breed and why some of us are still fighting the outcome?
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Jan 14, 2015 16:50:44 GMT
So was it the '93 or the '94 board who apparently caved and over-turned the prior decision not to admit?
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Jan 14, 2015 17:40:37 GMT
From what I gather it was the '94 AGM where the decision was made. In '93 they denied entry. I'm sure a lot of things were taking place during the year prior to the '94 AGM in the back rooms and alley's of the ADCA. I had also read that information on Sandi Thomas' website. I'd also heard a bit about it personally a few years ago through a person who was quite active at the time and didn't agree with what took place. It was a contributing factor to developing my further interest and seeking out more information in the subject. One of the drawbacks of being naturally curious I suppose!
|
|
|
|
Post by genebo on Jan 14, 2015 22:26:26 GMT
Did you note that in '93 Carol Davidson's motion was denied?
Did you notice that in '94 Carol Davidson was now a Director and the action had been accomplished?
I wonder what the source was of the handwritten letter that claimed that the polled was the result of a mutation? Now that we know that is false, it would be interesting to note who went out on a limb to make that claim.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Jan 14, 2015 22:36:02 GMT
Yup, I noticed. I also know how to get what you want, get elected!
|
|
|
|
Post by genebo on Jan 15, 2015 1:34:28 GMT
Or appointed.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Jan 15, 2015 5:22:08 GMT
The Dexter breed has always allowed hornless Dexters into the registry. There's nothing new about hornless Dexters.
Dexter owners have dehorned many Dexters over the past century and that has been fully acceptable.
The polled gene is simply the BEST way to dehorn Dexters.
The polled gene has saved thousands of calves from the torture of physical de-horning.
Some places are considering outlawing de-horning of cattle. That would mean that folks who currently physically dehorn their calves will have to switch to the polled gene... so thank goodness we already have the polled gene in Dexters.
There are MORE HORNED dexters today than 25 years ago, BECAUSE of the decision to accept polled Dexters.
Dexters were a limited, struggling breed before the polled gene came along.
The polled gene has invigorated the breed and increased interest in the breed for both genetically horned and polled dexters.
The demand for polled Dexters has skyrocketed, but the increased general interest in Dexters has also attracted people who like horns. So demand for horns has also increased.
Because we sometimes use heterozygous polled bulls (with a recessive horned gene) on our farm, we have had some occasional horned calves born. We keep the horns on and we sell those horned Dexters to folks who want horns. We're always sold out of horned Dexters. I've got one 2 year old horned heifer remaining that I'm keeping, and I've rejected several offers for her. I end up sending buyers wanting horns to a nearby horned-Dexter breeder.
In some cases, when someone wants to start a herd of polled dexters in the most economical way possible, I suggest that they acquire some horned dexter females and then acquire an excellent homozygous polled bull to create their own polled herd. This is how we started our own herd over a decade ago, when we purchased far more horned Dexters, than polled Dexters. We originally bought 11 horned dexters and only 3 polled dexters. We wouldn't have bought any at all if the polled gene didn't exist. So our desire for a polled herd, actually increased the demand for horned dexters.
The point is that the excitement for polled dexters is helping the demand for horned dexters.
If I were a traditionalist who loved horns, I'd work with all breeders including polled breeders to encourage more people to keep the horns on any calves born with horns. Bashing polled animals is getting you NOWHERE. Bashing 25 year old decisions is getting you NOWHERE.
Promoting horns in a positive way is the ONLY way to save horned Dexters.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Jan 15, 2015 14:38:40 GMT
There is a lot I disagree with there Kirk. Polled is not a stand alone trait. Other things were introduced when polled was brought in, and as you know the ADCA did NOT allow crossbreeding or upgrading. Bulls were not registered in England and I presume other countries.
If you look at the historical photos here, there are very few Dexters that resemble some of those beautiful Dexters. Even if you removed the horns from those old animals they wouldn't resemble the polled Dexters of today very much.
There has been a resurgence of interest in heritage breeds over the past decade, so I'd attribute most of the popularity of the Dexter to the renewed interest in those breeds, and not to the introduction of polled. We have a lot of people who are interested in our Scottish Highlands too, and they have pretty big horns don't you think? If they choose the Dexter over the Highland, it is usually due to the size and not the horns. That is one of the reasons we're doing a crossbred program with our Highlands to retain as much as possible of the Highland look with a smaller size. But I don't call or try to register those offspring as purebred Highlands. Notice I said as much as possible of the Highland look. At least in my lifetime, I'll never have enough generations to have a herd of Highland/Dexter crosses that look just like the pure Highlands they were bred from.
People are amazed by the small sizes of some of our Dexters. When they can walk up and scratch a waist high 6 year old bull it give them confidence. Many of them have had goats, and when they become acquainted with the small size of the Dexter, they see steaks, and cow not goat milk, and no more hoof trimming, and the overall "cool factor" of having a cow.
I wouldn't live in "some places" that outlawed the de-horning of cattle. That type of society might be Utopian to some you on the left coast and in scattered areas around the country, but it's not for me. Are they also going to ban the banding or cutting of bull calves? I think given the choice I'd rather have a hot iron on my head than the rubber band or scalpel treatment! I'm not willing to turn the Dexter into a slightly smaller version of the Angus in the process. If you insist on using the Dexter name, at least be honest about it like the English and Australians and designate it with "upgrade" status on the registrations.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Jan 15, 2015 17:46:10 GMT
I am in agreement with Lakeport on this, (surprise, surprise!)
Kirk, I certainly was not attracted to the breed due to polled-ness, as a matter of fact I was dismayed to first learn that there was such a thing as "polled" in Dexters, a dwarf horned breed.
Even more disappointed to find out that it was a result of outcrossing.
But here they are, here to stay, and the folks who breed them , love them. I think everyone here agrees a Dexter cross is still a great critter!
What I would wish for is that the distinction is made clear, that Modern Horned is not the same as Traditional Horned, there are other genetics going on there. It should be made clear on the pedigree, so that those searching for Polled get polled, and those searching for Traditional (meaning no recessive genes)Horned get traditional animals, not the horned offspring of polled.
That doesn't seem to much to ask, but I'm sure someone takes exception!
Bill
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2015 18:25:18 GMT
a couple of things stand out to me. Why was Dean Fleharty the one to announce the boards decision when he wasn't on the board. also noted after the 2 that caused this problem were using him before it was allowed must have been pretty sure of themselves. Also Fleharty looks like he joined the bandwagon pretty quick makes you wonder what his involvement with it was.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Jan 15, 2015 19:42:50 GMT
Mike, you've noticed that too huh? Back room and alley stuff... Funny how the Fleharty and Patton polled bulls were up and running so fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by genebo on Jan 15, 2015 19:47:11 GMT
Check the birth dates of Platinum's early offspring against these dates. See who the breeders were. Subtract 9 months and 10 days to see when they first used Platinum semen. You can assemble a list of the early participants.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Jan 15, 2015 20:13:41 GMT
The 1993 AGM was in June. Leadership ladder much as it is today. Officers, President ( Patton), Vice President ( changed between 93 & 94 and non-voting) and Sec-Treas(non-voting). Each region had a Director -voting position.
Did NONE of these people have ANY knowledge of events happening behind the scenes that between one June and the June a year later there was NO discussion about this? Same thing in 2004. The Directors huddled and made public pronouncements for members NOT to talk. . and sang the same old tiresome song. . . . "speak to your Director". Well, hold the mule please. . . . . . MY Director was on an entirely different page than a Director in a nearby region.
All leadership should be transparent but ADCA members simply don't care. They just want their papers to say their animals are registered. They have even stopped caring if the animals they page HUGE sums to purchase are what they are purported to be. ADCA leadership meets "IN SECRET" from the membership on a regular basis and has been doing so for years now. This was against the Delaware statutes and the bylaws until EVERY right of the membership was taken away. EVERY one. And if you do not believe me. . . . get the bylaws from 2003 and the ones from 2009 and compare them!
I do not for a minute take away the diligent and difficult job and the time devoted to these non-paying positions. . . . but even though there is no financial compensation. . . . . there is benefit attached. . . and it does not negate the actuality that the membership should be informed at all times. . . . and there should be real-time recorded/transcribed minutes available to each member and members should have a voice. The new bylaws preclude the members having any real say and the AGM's are just scripted events where what has been decided in secret is implemented.
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Jan 15, 2015 20:39:30 GMT
a couple of things stand out to me. Why was Dean Fleharty the one to announce the boards decision when he wasn't on the board. also noted after the 2 that caused this problem were using him before it was allowed must have been pretty sure of themselves. Also Fleharty looks like he joined the bandwagon pretty quick makes you wonder what his involvement with it was. I am as interested in what wasn't told as what was! So, are we to believe the board just moved on? Were these people mindless puppets? I cannot imagine a member of leadership ( a couple of them in particular) that would just accept an order to move on. Had they no idea what this meant to our breed? What earthly reason could be offered to excuse a couple of these people for permitting this to happen without a fight? IGNORANCE is the biggest one. Ignorance of the law specifically. The law WAS on the side of Dexters. . . . and the membership in the US. I wonder more and more lately what grounds might be found to actually file a class-action law suit. ( And I am not the only one). Those class action lawyers don't really need a valid reason . . they always end up with the money win or lose. The only thing in the past that was likely in the way was statute of limitations. . . but that's perhaps been legally breeched to where the clock is ticking again. Judy |
|
|
|
Post by Donlin Stud on Jan 15, 2015 20:47:51 GMT
Judy, its sad to say but this is exactly how it is in Australia as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Jan 15, 2015 21:42:50 GMT
Fact: ALL Dexters started as NON-Dexters... all dexters were UPGRADED from other breeds.
Fact: Original "Dexters" were originally selected from other breeds of cattle, simply based on visual inspection for short stature. Some were lethal gene chondro-dwarfs, and some were naturally short (True-Shorts).
Fact: Naturally True-Short dexters are JUST AS TRADITIONAL as Lethal-gene Chondro Dwarfs. In fact, the reason that a DNA test is required, is that it's often difficult to tell the difference between Natural True-Shorts and the Lethal-gene Chondrodysplastic Dwarfs. We wouldn't need a test if it was easy to tell.
Fact: There have always been scores of hornless Dexters due to dehorning. The polled gene is the ONLY 100% humane method to remove horns.
Fact: A ban against physical dehorning is being considered in the US. "The American Veterinary Medical Association, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and third-party animal welfare auditing groups recognize the benefits of polled genetics for the dairy industry, so there is absolutely no reason - and no excuse - for the cruel, unnecessary practice of dehorning to continue"
Fact: The polled gene is a single stand-alone gene. It's simply a horn regulator switch that is switched off. This stand-alone switching gene has ZERO linkage to other Dexter features such as size, color, behavior, calf size, etc.. Anyone with basic breeding skills could import the single stand-alone polled gene into their family of Dexters without changing their Dexter-family characteristics at all. (ask me how, I can show you).
|
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Jan 15, 2015 23:21:34 GMT
NOPE.
Nope.
No.
Polled is not dehorned, so nope.
Oh Horn Police.
Absolutely NOPE, Stand alone my ***! It's simply a Hapa. If it was gene splicing, yup, but nope.
|
|
|
|
Post by genebo on Jan 16, 2015 1:22:35 GMT
Everyone that doesn't know the difference between polled and dehorned, raise your hand ....... I thought so. Just one.
|
|
