|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 14, 2015 6:43:49 GMT
I LOVE Dexters.... they're part of my family. I 'd hate to see any of these traditional traits get lost... that's why I'm working hard at preserving these traits (Do you think I've missed some SPECIFIC TRAITS?). I've got lots of Dexters that have all these traits and I love them.
1. Bulls MUST be VERY friendly and VERY manageable, with lots of personality.
2. Cows MUST be sweet and let us work with their newborn calves (tagging/weighing, etc), and should have lots of personality.
3. Dexters must be COMPACT (not too large, not too small) Bulls between 38" - 44" at 3 years.
4. Dexters must be Black, Dun, or Red... no white other than near udders up to navel (white hairs in tail switch are ok)
5. Dexters must be Healthy and Hardy - can thrive and easily calve robust calves WITHOUT much shelter (other than trees/shade). Can thrive without a lot of chemicals, without a lot of vet work, without a lot of shots. Dexters should have naturally STRONG immune systems.
6. Dexters must be Thrifty - can thrive on forage and minerals alone WITHOUT grain supplements.
7. Dexters must be Dual purpose and productive... Beefy, and milky enough, but not so milky that they MUST be milked.
8. Dexters should have Lots of good general cattle conformation (sound udders, sound feet, strong backs, correct legs, good tracking, masculine bulls, etc.)
9. Dexters should be long-lived... Cows should make it to 18+ healthy productive years with no early arthritis, Bulls should make it to 13+ healthy years (if you don't eat them first).
10. While horns look terrific, some folks have been dehorning dexters for eons.... so both horned dexters and dexters without horns are traditional. If you're going to de-horn, you should consider using the gene that humanely removes horns.
Have I missed any important traits???
|
|
|
|
Post by wvdexters on Mar 14, 2015 18:42:16 GMT
Hi Kirk,
Spring is in the air here in the Appalachians. Just a hint of it, but it is coming I think. Finally .... I even saw three robins earlier!!! Very neat. This is a subject I'd love to talk about here. Not debate - just talk. There is so much interest here for all of us in the breed.
First off, let me say: I love your list. I believe it is a good list of very positive attributes for all Cattle as well as for our Dexters. (I guess I should clarify except for the size maybe, since our small size definitely doesn't fit the other breeds. LOL!!) I also like how you say you LOVE your Dexters, and call them part of your family. I do as well. 
I don't want to go through your whole list letter by letter, I'll just say a few things.
A definite yes on the bulls - Temperament. I like how you put this so high on your list. Bulls are so IMPORTANT. They make up half the genetics of the year's calves. It worries me, (especially on places like Facebook) where I keep seeing posts from Dexter breeders about bulls that are anything but - and they are still using them. It is bad enough the risk they are taking personally, but IMO they chance breeding this poor temperament INTO the herd. Masculinity definitely- A bull should be a Bull.
As Dexter breeders it is important for all of us to breed for and within the breed guidelines. This is so important to me personally. Again this is my opinion only, but I believe that most of the "issues" we have and are dealing with now have been created because so much of the membership as a whole have failed to do so, and unfortunately the leadership have chosen to go with it.
Healthy, Hardy, Thrifty --Yes! Because these are Dexters we are talking about. These are musts!!! But then I read others' posts: So many have no understanding of this. What they think and what they feed their animals. It is so surprising too me. This is what I got into Dexters to get away from. I mean so many out there are feeding for Jerseys and then saying look at mine ......... A true thrifty Dexter does not need this, and would actually be WAY TOO fat on all this grain and xtras.
Dual purpose / really tri-purpose is a must. And we all should be breeding for good conformation traits and productivity. A cow should be very capable of easily calving and raising a healthy beefy calf for the family while also providing milk for the family's use. With little input. She should be a healthy, easy-keeper, and have many productive years. I'm not sure where you get the ages you've listed here, because I don't know the percentages of people who keep their animals that long. I have seen a few listed up there in years though. One just last month was listed for sale on Facebook that was over 20 yrs I believe, and she had this yrs calf with her. Very, very impressive. If I had the room I believe I would've checked into her. Definitely good goals. But then we would probably also have to take things like location and conditions into consideration too.
Horns - I guess it depends on what we are talking about here and also how you look at it. I mean are we talking about physical appearance or genetic makeup.
If we are discussing simply PHYSICAL APPEARANCE - Then yes, I would have to agree with alot of what you say. Horns do look terrific!!! - and yes, some folks have been dehorning for a long time, possibly eons - So yes, Dexters with horns and Dexters without horns (removed) are both traditional. -BUT- GENETICALLY they are also the same. ex. If given just the genetic code of an animal (no photo or physical description) it would be impossible to discern if the animal has been dehorned or has his horns intact. Traditional
Now if the animal is polled, he has been dehorned at the genetic level. He may have a "similar" physical appearance as a dehorned Dexter but GENETICALLY the story is quite different. ex. If given just the genetic code of this animal (no photo or physical description) he could never be confused or taken for a Horned Dexter. They ARE different.
However you or I, or anyone else perceives this fact is up to each of us. But it doesn't change the truth.
Let me say this I think it is so important for all of us to realize that we are actually very close in our beliefs on a lot of ground here. Very, Very close. But interestingly enough coming from 2 different areas. Dexters are wonderful cattle and are a true joy to keep. They are calm, gentle animals with personality galore. Really if you think about it, we just provide them with some grass/hay, minerals and make sure they have water to drink and they pretty much take care of themselves and give us so much.
As for the modern vs. traditional question - My belief is that this is not a "this or that" situation but a "this and that" instead.
Polled dexters are modern. They are not traditional, but are something new to the breed. They are very popular with people today, and probably are a good part of the reason the breed is gaining in popularity. IMO. The honest truth is, that there are a lot of people out there who just don't like horned cattle, and if polled dexters did not exist they would be raising a different breed altogether. I've seen good and bad in these as well as the traditional types. Some are really nice cattle.
So Kirk, (hope you are still smiling) I have to say I like your list and am very interested in seeing what you produce in the future. It seems to me like you are going for something (as close as you can get) to the "traditional type" dexter only polled. It will be interesting to see how it progresses for you, and if you are able to get the height set where you are hoping.
We are working towards our own goals here at Knobley. Most very similar as I said.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 15, 2015 5:35:37 GMT
wvdexters, Thanks for the very thoughtful reply...
Just one comment, If there are two very "traditional" looking and acting dexters standing side by side, and the only difference is that one was born without horns and the other is born WITH horns.... Then it seems like the the very descriptive words "polled" and "horned" completely describe the difference, and those key words are already stored in the registry. Why come up with new words that are fuzzy and confusing and not well defined?
|
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Mar 15, 2015 13:39:41 GMT
Kirk
Horns. They are a foundation trait
Dwafism. A foundation trait
shape of head with dished face, prominent eyes, wide nostrils
immune system
personality
forage conversion
i am not sure the thousands of words used to discuss, describe, evaluate are any way relevant. What IS important most likely is the pedigree especially if parentage confirmed. Why? I can breed a Dexter to a Jersey and it will have a like appearance to most Dexters. Or to a number of other breeds. In the long run what defines a Dexter as a Dexter is the pedigree.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvdexters on Mar 15, 2015 23:40:17 GMT
Kirk, very good question. I've been thinking about this one all day, all the different angles, and my answer is simple but it does have a few parts.
First off, we are talking only about the terms here traditional, modern, polled. Not whether the animal being discussed is or is not eligible for registration.
I believe you are confusing/combining two totally different things here. I already discussed polled vs. horned.
Traditional vs. Non-traditional aka. Modern
Traditional simply means no upgrading. Modern has upgrading. Very simple
I know of no polled bloodlines that do not contain upgrading. Therefor while many dexters containing polled bloodlines in their pedigrees can be horned, all are definitely modern. The terms are neither "fuzzy" nor "confusing". They are actually quite simple and well defined.
I should also add, not to be rude in anyway; But I feel it is important because if I don't it seems like I am accepting and in full agreement. The above example you have given is completely impossible. Just one comment, If there are two very "traditional" looking and acting dexters standing side by side, and the only difference is that one was born without horns and the other is born WITH horns.... There is no "traditional" looking dexter born without horns. The Dexter breed is a horned breed. Always was.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 15, 2015 23:41:49 GMT
In the long run what defines a Dexter as a Dexter is the pedigree. Pedigree helps a little... But due to hidden genes, and mutations, and genetic drift, dexters with the very "purest" of pedigrees, can change over time into very NON-DEXTER animals. The ONLY thing that keeps dexters looking and acting like "Dexters" is continued selection against a set of standards. Pedigree only helps a little in the shorter run. Ongoing selection is EVERYTHING in the long haul. |
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Mar 16, 2015 0:08:36 GMT
Kirk
a breed survives through record keeping of the animals and their pedigrees. Breed associations should not bend the established standards and in most cases when they have it wasn't in the interest of the breed it was in the financial interests of the owners.
I disagree about the drift. It is my opinion that The genes of the early Dexters are very strong. Animals will come back to a traditional appearance easily enough.......but .......what about the genes we cannot see which can carry through many generations without being expressed. In the old days they called it throwback
judy
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 16, 2015 0:39:53 GMT
Kirk, very good question. I've been thinking about this one all day, all the different angles, and my answer is simple but it does have a few parts. First off, we are talking only about the terms here traditional, modern, polled. Not whether the animal being discussed is or is not eligible for registration. I believe you are confusing/combining two totally different things here. I already discussed polled vs. horned. Traditional vs. Non-traditional aka. Modern Traditional simply means no upgrading. Modern has upgrading. Very simple I know of no polled bloodlines that do not contain upgrading. Therefor while many dexters containing polled bloodlines in their pedigrees can be horned, all are definitely modern. The terms are neither "fuzzy" nor "confusing". They are actually quite simple and well defined. I should also add, not to be rude in anyway; But I feel it is important because if I don't it seems like I am accepting and in full agreement. The above example you have given is completely impossible. Just one comment, If there are two very "traditional" looking and acting dexters standing side by side, and the only difference is that one was born without horns and the other is born WITH horns.... There is no "traditional" looking dexter born without horns. The Dexter breed is a horned breed. Always was. Thanks again for giving this thought. I like things to be as clear as possible. For example, we already have the very clear terms "Chondro" vs. "Non-Chondro", while "short-legged" and "long-legged" are confusing and unnecessary terms. We have the terms "polled" vs. "horned" and those are very clear terms. "Upgrading" simply means that a dexter has a non-dexter in its background.... But ALL dexters have non-dexters in their backgrounds. So we can't ever say "upgrades" vs. "NO upgrades". But we could objectively say "This animal has a complete dexter pedigree back to at least 11 generations on every line" or "back 15 generations" or "back 6 generations" So an animal might be coded as: Non-Chondro Horned Complete 11 Generation Pedigree It might be fun for you to figure out how many generations your dexters go back on every line before you run into a blank or non-dexter. PS. I don't think the breed description ever banned Dexters without horns, that's why so many folks de-horn. If you allow removal of horns, then polled is simply removal of horns. PPS. The terms "modern" or "traditional" have NEVER been defined by the registry, so each person can have their own definition of those words... That's why those terms are subjective and useless. |
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Mar 16, 2015 0:50:49 GMT
I think that genetic drift is a far bigger issue for those that breed from Dexters with upgraded genetics. Those who lean toward the traditional Dexter are more likely to be attuned to the traits of the Dexter breed and working hard to preserve them. Furthermore, we are a LOT more discriminating about the bulls that we keep intact. Like it or not, in recent years if it's polled and A2/A2 it's been advertised as a herd bull. In fact I remember a couple of years ago Kirk, you were saying that you had 4 of them to sell one year, not counting those you probably already sold. In my opinion, one in every 10 bulls MAY be suitable as a breeding bull.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 16, 2015 4:28:23 GMT
I think that genetic drift is a far bigger issue for those that breed from Dexters with upgraded genetics. ALL Dexters were upgraded from non-Dexters in the past For example, look at this cow Appears to be only 50% dexter dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=1428 |
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Mar 16, 2015 9:53:07 GMT
I think that genetic drift is a far bigger issue for those that breed from Dexters with upgraded genetics. ALL Dexters were upgraded from non-Dexters in the past For example, look at this cow Appears to be only 50% dexter dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=1428 Kirk, you know as well as I that there are a lot of errors and omissions in the ADCA registry, especially when it goes back a number of years. We happen to own many of Lady Black Fortune's close descendants: Louise : dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=11924&ParentID=8945&Page=1&Sort=6Mike: dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=13038&ParentID=8945&Page=1&Sort=6Whoopie: dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=023501&ParentID=8945&Page=1&Sort=6As you can see from the photos, other than the fact they've been dehorned, they look like Dexters in every way. Louise in fact, looks a lot like that photo you like ot post of the dun Woodmagic cow all the time. I haven't seen you post any of your Dexters that look like that in any color! I'll contact the registrar and get her working on completing the construction of the registry back to the earliest days. And I'm sure Judy will chip on on her thoughts about the Tak-Sca-du-Hav herd and Otto Jensen. By the way, did you know the sire of many of yours, Saltaire Platinum is listed as a steer, or was never born in the first place? Wait, even worse, he's horned!!! Who is the sire of all those "polled" Dexters then??? dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=P2708&HorseName=saltaire%20platinum&Page=1&Sort=0 |
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Mar 16, 2015 12:40:35 GMT
Kirk>> "All dexters were upgraded from Non-dexters in the past"
Kirk this is like a mantra for you. It is true every cow from every cow breed will have nons in their history. At what point do you cease nons?
The white dexter breeding program began around 2004 or so, right? Just ten years after SP was imported to the US. A pedigree of a purebred white Dexter would be of higher percentage than SP.
Should they be allowed into the registry Kirk? If not,why not?
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by wvdexters on Mar 16, 2015 17:25:03 GMT
Kirk,
Hi,
You say you like things as clear as possible - OK, here goes.
For example, we already have the very clear terms "Chondro" vs. "Non-Chondro", while "short-legged" and "long-legged" are confusing and unnecessary terms. --------- Really, really hoping we can avoid debating on this subject here on this thread - so let's just stick to the terms here. (I think it would be best for our discussion.) LOL - But my question then ---- Why do you continue to insist on using the term "True Short"?? As it is definitely confusing and unnecessary by your own definition. The term has no registry definition at all, is completely subjective, and therefore completely useless. I'm sorry but these are Your Own Words and Definitions. No double talk. So how is it then?? You see, you just can't have it both ways. If you want the "true short" thing (which I'm pretty sure is your own creation) you have to be willing to accept the rest. At least they have an historical value to the breed since they were the proper terms of the time before chondro was identified; which yours doesn't.
We have the terms "polled" vs. "horned" and those are very clear terms. Yes, Very clear and useful terms. But I do think it is important to add that up until very recently the term polled was never used in the Dexter Breed. It is a very recent introduction requiring a rewrite of the Breed Description.
"Upgrading" simply means that a dexter has a non-dexter in its background.... But ALL dexters have non-dexters in their backgrounds. I'm sorry, but this is an argument that I just can't accept. It is just so obvious and rather silly. It seems to have started popping up right around the time the "spontaneous mutation theory" as the origin of the polled Dexter started really losing ground. Yes, all Dexter Cattle have non-dexter ancestors. All cattle breeds do. In fact all breeds of every animal do. Dogs descend from wolves, domestic chickens from jungle fowl etc. But that does not mean that huskies and poodles are the same ,nor leghorns and dominiques. Yes, they all do share common ancestory, But at some point breeds were developed, separate breeds. Dexters are a separate and unique breed of cattle.
"Upgrading" simply means that a dexter has a non-dexter in its background.... We agree
So we can't ever say "upgrades" vs. "NO upgrades". I disagree, We can look at the written records and learn. Whether we personally like the information or not. We can look at the WRITTEN RECORDS which are there for all to see, and objectively say Yes, this animal has outcrossed (other than dexter) genetics and is therefore a product of up-grading.
So an animal might be coded as:
Non-Chondro
Horned
Complete 11 Generation Pedigree
Yes, or it could much easier be coded as simply non-chondro, horned, traditional if no record of upgrading has occurred; or modern if we have written record of upgrading (or I guess here you "could" put upgrade instead.) But personally I think the word modern is far more palatable. (Not important but my guess is that the registrar would also prefer this way over yours. Can you imagine all of the codes that would be needed
As for the project, yes the history is fascinating. Legacy is working hard at it.
P.S. Honestly Kirk, I don't believe for a minute that you actually believe that any more than I do. You are an intelligent man.
P.P.S. The assoc. hasn't yet, but the breeders sure have. We were tasked over and over, if you want to save them, get together and work together. Well we have, and we are. Given time
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Mar 16, 2015 17:59:30 GMT
Karrie you should be the official spokesperson of the traditional Dexter...  You know the nice and pleasant face and personality for the behind the scenes scrappers like Judy is. Well, actually we need both types! |
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 16, 2015 21:56:12 GMT
The word "Short" is already defined by everyone on the planet. It means the animal is short. Since Dexters are supposed to be a short breed, then I'd say that any animal that measures within the breed description should be considered "Short". ANYONE can understand that logic. dictionary.reference.com/browse/shortTrue = True-Breeding, which is an official genetics term that means that the animal breeds-true. So a "true-breeding short" animal (or True-Short) is a straight-forward descriptor. If an animal is short (meets the breed description) and if it breeds true (shortness isn't due to a heterozygous mix of Chondro), then it's a true short. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_breeding_organism"Modern" simply means "of the recent era" .... So a "modern dexter" would be ANY dexter born after let's say 1990 or so. So ALL dexters alive today are modern dexters, and the old dead dexters are historical dexters. Any dexters with missing gaps on their pedigrees back to the year 1800 should be considered as having non-dexters on their old pedigrees. So all dexters have "upgrades". I'm not willing to let people claim that a pedigree with missing gaps is "free of upgrades". Prove to me that this example animal is free of any non-dexters back to the year 1800 (or whatever year you purists are using as the official starting year) dextercattle.org/pedigreedb/ponyweb.cgi?horse=1428How about this one legacydextercattleregistry.com/pedigree.php?registry=A®no=1347 |
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Mar 16, 2015 23:03:50 GMT
Getting a bit snarkey, there...
I know you are trying to prove that yours are made of meat and hair, so they're the same as traditional, but they are Modern, so they have introgressions from other breeds, you can't go back.
Funny how you believe that the brindle trait can lie dormant for generations, but the genetics of the whole other half of a cow gets left out when you breed for Polled.
Amazing.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 17, 2015 5:11:22 GMT
99.999% of all dexters' genetics come from other breeds.
Most ALL your supposed "traditional" / "legacy" pedigrees have animals on the pedigree with no parentage listed at all.
PS. What makes dexters, "Dexters" is continued selection for Dexter traits according to the breed description.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 17, 2015 5:52:51 GMT
Kirk>> "All dexters were upgraded from Non-dexters in the past" Kirk this is like a mantra for you. It is true every cow from every cow breed will have nons in their history. At what point do you cease nons? Should [white dexters] be allowed into the registry ? If not,why not?
You close the registry, when the registry association decides to do so. It's a choice of a registry to make rules and to make decisions. Should White dexters be allowed in the registry? .... Yes if they meet the registration requirements, but then they should be culled/corrected for not meeting the breed description. Same thing goes for bulls that are under 38" tall at 3 years. You allow them in the registry if they meet registration requirements, but you cull or correct them in subsequent generations to bring them in line with the breed description. Anyone not working toward breeding within the breed description, should be challenged. |
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Mar 17, 2015 10:12:06 GMT
Why do we use 3 years old in the guidelines Kirk? You've said yourself, Dexter bulls should live 13 years if you don't eat them first, and Dexter cows should live 18 plus years. Everybody knows that either don't reach their full size until 5-8 years of age. Isn't that a bit deceptive to people new to the breed who have the expectation that their Dexter is going to be at or below the top end of the guideline at 8 years of age?
Anytime you introduce a different breed into the Dexter, as was done with the upgrading program, introduces many challenges toward staying within the breed guidelines. As Judy mentioned, there are throwbacks, and there are also traits which may not readily express themselves to a less experienced breeder, who then passes their breedings on to others. You see it happening now with the polled in particular.
Anything polled and A2/A2 is offered as a breeding bull, why don't you admit it? And then try to defend that this will be a positive thing for the breed as a whole. As I've said before, you're preaching to the wrong choir here. You should be on other sites encouraging these breeders to be more selective about what they have to offer as a breeding bull, instead of just going for the quick buck and offering him for sale for $2500 on Facebook before his mother has even licked him off and cleaned her afterbirth.
We've steered 16 bull calves in the past 15 months, and retained ZERO for breeding, other than two young ones born in August and January of this year that we're still evaluating. Our last bull retained as a herd prospect was born in December of 2013. The only reason he's intact was that my wife said "NO, he's a good one". I had to admit he was out of our prettiest cow. Around August of last year she was vindicated, when he beat the Wieringa's young bull champion from the AGM one month later at a local fair. Needless to say I'll never live that one down.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvdexters on Mar 17, 2015 16:38:18 GMT
Hi Kirk,
First let me say, After reading your newest post that I feel I owe you an apology for mine yesterday. I used the word "silly" and I shouldn't have. This is not a debate but a discussion, and I should have chosen a better term. Please know that I was referring to the argument and not to you. I very much meant what I said when I referred to you as an intelligent person. Very much so.
I see from your last post that you are sticking with your term "true short". OK ........ Please don't get me wrong, I actually liked the term; used it for many yrs. But then, all of your postings got me thinking and really woke me up!! You are exactly right. We all should strive to be clear when we discuss these topics. Especially when we are speaking/writing in a public forum. People are out there trying to learn and get all this information sorted out. While it makes little difference what terms we choose to use in private, we must remember that here (and in other areas such as Facebook, in other groups and forums where we belong, sites, and definitely when we are talking to prospective buyers and those new to the breed) we should ALL strive to use the Correct terms.
I ask you again to please give it some thought and reconsider your own words.
Your "true short" is simply a small sized non-chondro. Genetically: non-chondro. Appearance: small ....... There is nothing overly special about them in anyway. I personally own two myself. Many of us here do.
Your breakdown of the term is essentially useless. Yes, while I am aware of the definitions of both of the words "true" and "short"; I also am quite aware of the definitions of the words "long" and "leg" and well, and you have already covered "short". So I ask you again, Where is the difference?? How can one term be proper and OK?
Truth be told, really none are. BUT - what YOU MUST Remember is - If you choose to continue to use this term - Then you must also fully accept ALL of the others and NEVER fault anyone for choosing to use their own.
-----------As for the term "Modern" - I also took the time to search the word
mod·ern
adj
of or relating to the present or recent times as opposed to the remote past.
noun
a person who advocates or practices a departure from traditional styles or values.
So while your definition "of the recent era" probably is not the very best fit, I believe these to be quite good. (My computer skills are very limited so all I did was type in the words "modern definition" and this is what came up. I personally feel the 2nd to be the most useful in this particular situation. Modern as a noun.
Anyway, I truly believe that this word modern was chosen as a kindness. It sort of says it all without hitting people over the head with it. But you are correct that the term "upgrade" would also be right on the nose. I still must say though, that as a fellow breeder who dearly loves my little "upgrade" I tell her she's "modern".
As for the "you purists" comment, I'm going to take that just as a sign of frustration on your part. We all say things that come out different than how we they were truly meant. No worries. Purist, no far from it. Like I said, my girl Kate (LHR Kate II) is modern (upgraded). She is black, horned, absolutely beautiful and has Lucifer in her pedigree. She's a great girl, and gives me a beautiful fat, happy calf every yr .
Kirk......You know, one thing I've really never understood is why some people are offended by the modern/traditional/legacy terms. I've just never gotten it. But like I've said so many times I'm not a "this or that" person but a "this and that" person. Please bare with me while I explain.
Often The same people who by their own words do not care for the Dexter "type" portrayed in the historic photos are offended when a difference is pointed out (by someone other than themselves) in them and their own and favorite "type". The type that they themselves love and have chosen to breed. You would think that they would be like "Yes!!!" Especially in the case of polled breeders - most of whom view polled as being an improvement made in the breed and their "type" as the "premiere type"; how could they ever be offended by the category "modern". Especially with so much money invested in it.
Then there is the fact that so many of today's breeders have marketed their whole herds on the statement that the English bulls (bulls that were products of the upgrading programs in that country) brought with them improved dairy, conformation, along with the polled etc. This is their whole thing, and yet are somehow offended now and continually complain that their is no difference - absolutely no difference. I am perplexed and I see it all of the time. I don't know.
The terms are simple and not meant to put down any particular group of animals or group of breeders. Truth be told most overlap. I myself have 2 (trad, mod), Judy 3 for sure (legacy, trad, mod), Hans all 4, Gene 2(trad, leg and I think some mod in past) etc. I think Mike has 2 (leg for sure and trad?) My point is that it is just developed as a simple way to identify the bloodlines that started disappearing when the newer bloodlines came in. That's all there is to it. Now why are they so important?? Many people like the old lines. I understand that you yourself are not one of us, but that doesn't change the fact or diminish the importance of it. We like them; we think they are a very important part of the Dexter breed; we hate that they are disappearing; and we want to do everything we can do to preserve them and save them from just fading away. That's it................That is all that we are trying to do.
To save them, you have to know what to save, you have to identify them........ You have to get the word out so that others know what you are trying to do.......... People can either choose to become involved or not. That is a personal decision and up to each one of us..........
We can have both here. The animals seems to get along pretty well, it is the people who are struggling. Kirk let me say again, I like the goals you have for your herd. They are great and for the most part I personally agree with most all of them. Yes, I would tweak a few here and there, but that's all part of the fun of it isn't it.
Hubby is hollering, and I have to go. Hope you all have a great day, and I'll try to get back on for the rest later.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 17, 2015 21:13:19 GMT
Thanks again for the very thoughtful reply.
It would be nice if we had a common set of clarifying terms that we could ALL agree upon.
The terms "Short-legged" and "Long-legged" simply confuse most new folks, especially since there are some short-legged animals that are non-chondro, and there are some long-legged animals that are chondro.
We should be able to talk about leg length, meaning length of the leg and not some secret code for "chondro".
For example, someone should be able to say "I like short-legged cattle without chondro-genes" and that should be clear to everyone.
The terms "modern" and "traditional" simply confuse many people, because when two animals that look exactly the same, one might be called "traditional" and the other "modern" and that's VERY frustrating and confusing.
I'd have NO problem if folks want to say "Dexters without horns don't look very traditional"... that sentence makes sense to me.
But then, when a polled animal has a horned calf that looks absolutely traditional...., you still say "No, that's modern" That's where you lose folks.
When you say a VERY traditional-looking horned animal is "Modern" it discredits your terminology.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonecowhand on Mar 17, 2015 23:32:39 GMT
That's because you want to muddy the waters where introgressions have occurred.
"Modern" was a term coined for the benefit of owners of polled and their unfortunately horned offspring that was considered to be more palatable than say, "mutt". It's not the look, it's the breeding.There's other stuff in there (like brindle!)
You are trying to mince words. the terminology is understood by most. Sorry.
Without exception, anyone who owns traditional Dexters knows what they are. You don't want them, why make up stuff?
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 18, 2015 2:51:25 GMT
Why do we use 3 years old in the guidelines ? You've said yourself, Dexter bulls should live 13 years if you don't eat them first, and Dexter cows should live 18 plus years. Everybody knows that either don't reach their full size until 5-8 years of age. Isn't that a bit deceptive to people new to the breed who have the expectation that their Dexter is going to be at or below the top end of the guideline at 8 years of age? Anytime you introduce a different breed into the Dexter, as was done with the upgrading program, introduces many challenges toward staying within the breed guidelines. As Judy mentioned, there are throwbacks, and there are also traits which may not readily express themselves to a less experienced breeder, who then passes their breedings on to others. You see it happening now with the polled in particular. Anything polled and A2/A2 is offered as a breeding bull, why don't you admit it? And then try to defend that this will be a positive thing for the breed as a whole. As I've said before, you're preaching to the wrong choir here. You should be on other sites encouraging these breeders to be more selective about what they have to offer as a breeding bull, instead of just going for the quick buck and offering him for sale for $2500 on Facebook before his mother has even licked him off and cleaned her afterbirth. We've steered 16 bull calves in the past 15 months, and retained ZERO for breeding, other than two young ones born in August and January of this year that we're still evaluating. Our last bull retained as a herd prospect was born in December of 2013. The only reason he's intact was that my wife said "NO, he's a good one". I had to admit he was out of our prettiest cow. Around August of last year she was vindicated, when he beat the Wieringa's young bull champion from the AGM one month later at a local fair. Needless to say I'll never live that one down. Why use the 3-year height guidelines?.... Because that's typical in a number of breeds and because you need to make a judgement before the animal is too ingrained in a breeding program. If a cow is 41" at age 3, she's likely not going to be a giant later on. If she's already a giant at age 3, then you might want to remove her from your breeding program. Concerning introducing a different breed into dexters.... Nobody has done that in America for quite a while. Nobody is suggesting we start doing it now. EVERY Dexter has scores of upgrades and errors in its distant pedigree so even the purist of dexters have a lot of non-dexter genes. So continued selection for Dexter traits is critical for ALL of us. I've looked up lots of "traditional" dexters in Judy's database, and many of them have fairly recent ancestors in the 1950's and 1960's that appear to be NOT dexters with NO dexter parents listed. I agree with being picky about bulls. One thing to keep in mind is that in the case of polled stock, the folks who started the spread of polled Dexters were among the smartest and best breeders of Dexter Cattle. The first polled herds were pretty stunning with top-notch genetics (Llanfair, Circle H, Belle Fourche, Hillview, SGF, Glenn Land). They weren't backyard breeders but they were/are knowledgeable cattle people. They gave polled Dexters a really great start. I'd bet that if you picked the 20 worst Dexter bulls being used today, I'd bet that all or nearly all of those 20 worst bulls would NOT be red and polled. Even the most mediocre of polled bulls usually have some terrific genetics in their immediate pedigrees. A mediocre bull out of excellent parents and grandparents can still throw some very nice calves.... but a mediocre bull out of a long line of mediocre animals, typically throws mediocre calves. At some point soon, the market will be crowded with lots of red, homozygous polled A2/A2 bulls, and then folks will be able to get even more picky in buying them and more will be culled. Certainly we need to ALL be culling appropriately regardless of whether the animals are considered to be "legacy" or "traditional" or Polled. Here's a picture of a red polled bull that I'm eating right now (he had a minor flaw and I took him off the market)....  Lakeportfarms, I know you are a skilled breeder and an A+ grazing manager, and I'm certainly NOT preaching to you and I respect your concerns that we step up the quality of our breed... In fact, I'd like to see you develop a consistent LakePortfarms line of dexter cattle over coming decades. If they can breed true, they will have a lasting impact on the Dexter breed and folks will be seeking your family of cows for many, many decades to come. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 15:39:38 GMT
wvdexters, for the record not counting steers just breeding animals. I have 3 modern(polled line) mother, daughter and grand daughter. Mother and daughter are polled and granddaughter is horned. I have 17 Legacy and no traditional animals.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvdexters on Mar 21, 2015 0:53:25 GMT
Hi Kirk, No internet for a few days here. The joke is that the wind blew
I agree, it would be nice if we had a definite set of terms that we all agree upon. That would certainly help out wouldn't it. I saw a conversation on FB a few weeks ago that was so sad. They not only had themselves confused, they had me confused too. LOL I had to go clear back through all the older postings to try to figure out what they were trying to discuss. And these were Dexter breeders on a Dexter site. Needless to say it was a mess.
When discussing this I think we need to remember that before chondro was identified and a test was developed, all we had to go on was the visual appearance of the animal. It was obvious to all that we were looking at two different things going on here within the breed. (and still are today) We had short, round, animals with dish shaped faces, and a very unique look about them - and then we had taller, larger, cattle with the more usual features and a longer face -- both occurring in the same herd and from the same parents. Two different body types. The first type were called "short-legged" "shorties", the second "long-legged" or "non-shorts". Most were easy to identify when all the characteristics were considered, but some were difficult. This method worked pretty well, But this was visual and appearance based only.
Then chondro was identified - Now we are talking about the genetic level. (Something they had no access to in the past) This new discovery changed everything especially with the addition of a test. Now we KNOW genetically, which body type we have for sure every time.
So my point, historically animals that were labeled as "short leg" were not just simply short in stature; they were the Body TYPE that were called "short leg". In other words "shorties" were not simply just short Dexters. There was far more to it than just that.
I think the confusion really comes in when we forget this fact. The truth is that with so many breeders today choosing not to breed chondro, many just haven't seen them and have little knowledge in this area. Instead they assume it is all simply about the height of the animal in question and lose sight of the whole pkg. of characteristics.
Soooo Yes - it is crazy confusing when one person is talking at the genetic level, someone else visual, and someone else simply about height. It just doesn't work.
As for the correct terms for our two body types within the breed
Chondro positive, carrier works. Genetic dwarf I like and think works. (This one requires that people understand that chondro is a type of dwarfism; but it does give the benefit of a mental picture.) Shortie too many people today equate it simply with height and not the fact that we are actually referring to the Body TYPE called shortie.
Chondro neg, non-carrier, Normal, Genetic non-dwarf. Long-legged is probably better than Tall, or non-short; but still is probably taken by breeders today more as a comment on the length of the animal's legs over the fact that we are trying to refer to the "Dexter Type."
Now when we are talking about simply the size of the animal not the genes We have some Dexters that are genetically non-chondro and still fit into the height guidelines. Yes, I agree what a mouthful -- Small non-carrier, small non-dwarf work. With the history as it is, we should try to avoid the word short here, because so many people identify the word short with the other body type (chondro). And we get confusion.
We should be able to talk about leg length, meaning length of the leg and not some secret code for "chondro". For example, someone should be able to say "I like short-legged cattle without chondro-genes" and that should be clear to everyone. Yes. I agree. Here we are talking about the second body type. Non-dwarf, Non-chondro.
The terms "modern" and "traditional" simply confuse many people, because when two animals that look exactly the same, one might be called "traditional" and the other "modern" and that's VERY frustrating and confusing. Again. These terms refer to the bloodlines of the animal, not the appearance. We have already discussed this. upgrading = modern (very simple)
I'd have NO problem if folks want to say "Dexters without horns don't look very traditional"... that sentence makes sense to me. We agree.
But then, when a polled animal has a horned calf that looks absolutely traditional...., you still say "No, that's modern" That's where you lose folks. No, the calf is modern because of the upgraded genetics in its bloodline. Again Upgrading = modern. But on the subject of appearance, with so many people today choosing not to breed the old traditional lines many breeders haven't even seen a real Traditional Dexter.
When you say a VERY traditional-looking horned animal is "Modern" it discredits your terminology. No it doesn't Kirk. You just don't like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 21, 2015 20:53:26 GMT
But then, when a polled animal has a horned calf that looks absolutely traditional...., you still say "No, that's modern" That's where you lose folks. No, the calf is modern because of the upgraded genetics in its bloodline. Again Upgrading = modern. But on the subject of appearance, with so many people today choosing not to breed the old traditional lines many breeders haven't even seen a real Traditional Dexter.
When you say a VERY traditional-looking horned animal is "Modern" it discredits your terminology. No it doesn't Kirk. You just don't like it.
I have problems with words that aren't very clear, when there are better choices that would be more clear. The problem with the words "modern" and "traditional" is that their primary meanings in most animal breeds is a physical description of how an animal might look or behave. For example, a traditional Hereford cow was rather short and fat, and the modern ones are quite tall and more muscly and lean. A traditional house might be how the houses looked 200 years ago vs. high-tech look of some homes of today. Because ALL of our animals are "modern" (all born after 1990), then we are left with "modern-looking" vs. "traditional-looking". While there are lots of truly traditional houses (actually built before 1890) on the market, there are ZERO dexters available born before 1990. So there are no truly traditional dexters, just traditional-looking dexters. Anyone breeding "traditional-looking" dexters today, are just breeding re-creations of traditional dexters (the real traditional dexters are all dead long ago). If you want to distinguish between animals that have paper pedigrees going way back, I have no problem with a term like "Legacy-Pedigree" or "Complete-Pedigree" with no recorded upgrades since some distant point in time, as long as we educate people to understand that having a legacy pedigree DOESN'T tell you anything about the animal itself (because due to genetic drift, or unlucky selection, even a legacy-pedigreed dexter can look VERY different from how dexters should look/behave). I do think that how you are using the term "Traditional" is VERY confusing and inaccurate. The term "Traditional" as you are using it simply means: "The pedigree has lots of blanks on it, and we hope it isn't outcrosses, but if we just cross our fingers and assume the blanks are not outcrosses, then we can get away with calling them 'traditional' (even though they may not look traditional) and we can just say that we haven't had time to research their blanks even though we know that those blanks are likely outcrosses..... we don't spend any time looking into these animals because we're afraid we won't be able to prove that there aren't any outcrosses." The term "Modern" as you are using it simply means: "We hate some famous animal, so we spent thousands of hours pouring over every detail of the ancient pedigree to try to find some possible outcross long ago" So really, there is ZERO difference between "modern" and "traditional" as you are using them.... But "Legacy Pedigree" does have some merit on paper. |
|
|
|
Post by genebo on Mar 21, 2015 21:54:27 GMT
The words Legacy, Traditional and Modern were chosen to describe certain Dexter cattle. In doing so, Judy gave them a meaning that noone else can change. These words are now a label, used as a noun.
Lots of words have multiple meanings. It would be stupid to sit and argue about the meaning of a word that has different meanings, when you obviously don't understand the different ways the word is used.
Here are some more words you can argue about: pot, head, gay, bad, fast, wicked, loose, drunk, the list goes on. Don't bother to tell us what each of these words means to you. It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is what the word means to the user.
Legacy is the label used to describe American Dexter cattle with no recorded instance of outcrossing.
Traditional is the label used to describe Dexters that would be Legacy except for Bullfinch.
Modern is the label used to describe the cattle that have Dexter and one of the upgraded English imports recorded in their ancestry.
The label was coined out of necessity to give us a common term to refer to all of those cattle. It is a politically correct term that replaces quite an impressive array of derogatory terms that were formerly used to label those cattle.
You should be grateful for the term Modern.
Here is the entry in the Oxford English Dictionary for the word cascade. It contains 9 different definitions:
www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/cascade
Which one of them are you?
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 22, 2015 0:18:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Mar 22, 2015 2:00:07 GMT
No, Kirk. .. .I would call those Legacy. They are American foundation cows. You listed the same one twice by the way. ( 642).
The pedigree for 642 is complete. Complete all the way to the Irish foundation cows ! ! ! ! !
I didn't follow 1556 all the way back. . .
However, what part of , " if an ancestor is missing then it is a work in progress", did you not understand?
I am still baffled that both you and the ADCA leadership keep looking for ways to discredit the horned Dexters lineage in America in order to bolster the credibility and purity of a bull that was NOT a purebred bull. That really says something for the state of desperation.
Isn't it interesting that the only thing preservation interests have asked of ADCA leadership is to make a seperation/category in the registry, one which includes the horned bloodlines and one all the descendents of the polled lines. Then breeders know what they are breeding an can make informed choices. A reasonable resolution. I cannot understand why that is such a threat to polled? Instead, leadership chooses to publish an article destructive to the entire American herd to bolster polled and discredit the traditional animals. Incredible. Udderly incredible.
Judy
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Mar 22, 2015 4:15:21 GMT
As long as a dexter's pedigree research is a "work in progress" it means that when you finish your research, you may find that they have outcrosses too... so to claim that they don't have outcrosses, before the research is complete, is premature. Remember, I'm not discrediting ANY animals at all. I'm saying that there are only 2 things important for a registered dexter. 1. It needs to be registrable. 2. It needs to be reasonably close to the breed standard. If we find some flaw in the distant pedigrees of your "traditional horned" dexters or any other other dexters, it doesn't discredit any of today's dexters. It's just a fairly useless (but historically interesting) piece of information. In fact, geneticists will tell you that pedigrees beyond 5 generations are fairly worthless for most purposes (except that they are very historically interesting and it's fun to look at them. I do appreciate the hard work that historians do to track this old info because it's interesting. Remember, that I'm a fan of looking at pictures of compact, horned dexters and I hope some breeders will continue to breed them. Concerning separate registries, in the days of computers, it would be silly to make separate registries for polled vs. horned, or red vs. black vs. dun, or chondro vs. non-chondro.... Computers do a great job of letting us sort things as we wish... in fact you can look at a list of animals with just one of those traits, or with mixes of those various traits. Computers allow each of us to separate animals as we each wish and the ADCA pedigree system works pretty well at doing that. There are 4728 polled dexters and 27965 horned dexters listed in the ADCA system. By the way, here's another "traditional" animal that's missing information.... Is it because there are possible outcrosses? legacydextercattleregistry.com/pedigree.php?registry=A®no=66B |
|
You know the nice and pleasant face and personality for the behind the scenes scrappers like Judy is. Well, actually we need both types!
